1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1211 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.18 OF 2009 Omprakash Sahgal .. Plaintiff Versus CitiBank N.A. & Ors. .. Defendants and Rupen V. Kikamsey .. proposed defendant Mr.Mehul Shah for plaintiff Mr.Shyam Mehta with N.Mukerji i/b. M/s.Wadia Gandhy & Co. for defendant No.1 Ms.Pooja Tidke with Gautam Tiwari i/b. ALMT Legal for defendant No.2 and for applicant in chamber summons. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : November 23, 2009. P.C.: 1] After hearing learned Counsel for plaintiff and the learned Counsel for applicant, I am satisfied that for enabling this Court to pass an effective, proper and complete decree in the suit, presence of applicant is necessary. Ultimately, who is entitled to return of the documents/ securities placed at the disposal of the bank is a matter which concerns both, the plaintiff and the applicant. Reluctance of the plaintiff to 2 implead the applicant apart, it is for enabling this Court to determine their inter se rights, that the presence of applicant becomes necessary. In such circumstances, keeping open all contentions on merits, the chamber summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). Amendments to be carried out within two weeks from today. Amended copy of plaint be served within two weeks thereafter. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J) 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.101 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.18 OF 2009 Omprakash Sahgal .. Plaintiff Versus CitiBank N.A. & Ors. .. Defendants and Rupen V. Kikamsey .. proposed defendant Mr.Mehul Shah for plaintiff Mr.Shyam Mehta with N.Mukerji i/b. M/s.Wadia Gandhy & Co. for defendant No.1 Ms.Pooja Tidke with Gautam Tiwari i/b. ALMT Legal for defendant No.2 and for applicant in chamber summons. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : November 23, 2009. P.C.: 1] Heard learned Counsel for plaintiff, defendants and the proposed defendant, who has just now been impleaded. 2] In the circumstances of the case and considering that there is a dispute as to who should be entitled to the return of title documents, 4 pertaining to securities, interest of justice would be sub-served by making this notice of motion absolute with a direction that Citibank – defendant No.1 shall deposit the documents in this Court in a sealed cover with the Prothonotary & Senior Master. The Prothonotary shall retain the said documents until further orders in the suit. 3] Let compliance with this direction be made within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Upon documents being deposited in a sealed cover, plaintiff is at liberty to seek such other and further reliefs, including in terms of the prayers in the notice of motion. All contentions of plaintiff and proposed defendants are kept open. Motion is made absolute accordingly. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)