: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO.1652 OF 1986 Madhuri Mukul Dalal .. Plaintiff v/s. Sohan M. Shah & Ors. .. Defendants ......... Ms. H. Manik i/by Hemangi Modi for the plaintiff Mr. S. Samdani i/by Dave & Girish & Co. for defendant nos.26 to 31 and 38 to 44. Ms. R. Rai i/by M/s. Udwadia & Udeshi for defendant nos.12 to 16. Ms. Punita Soni i/by M/s. Bilawala & Co. for defendant no.32 ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, JJ. MARCH, 22nd 2010. P.C. : 1. Learned advocate for the plaintiff who is the beneficiary under the Trust wants to withdraw the suit. The Chamber Summons No.429 of 2010 has been taken out by defendant nos.12 to 16 who are also beneficiaries. These defendants have taken out the aforesaid chamber summons as they want to transpose themselves. : 2 : 2. Learned advocate for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff is the old lady. She is a beneficiary under the Trust and the plaintiff does not wish to prosecute the suit in view of her advanced age. 3. In my view, this Court need not wait for Chamber Summons to be disposed of since the suit came to be instituted by only one beneficiary. If the beneficiary who instituted the suit wants to withdraw it, certainly, that can be allowed. 4. Needless to mention that if certain persons who were joined as defendants and who happened to be the beneficiaries, wish to institute a Suit for protecting their rights as a beneficiary, they are free to institute a substantive Suit because certain facts which are stated in the plaint may provide to defendant nos.12 to 16 a separate cause of action. 5. Certain interim orders are presently running against defendant no. 24. Since the suit is being allowed to be withdrawn, these interim orders may continue for sometime so that defendant nos.12 to 16 may institute a separate Suit and try to protect their interest. Hence, the suit is allowed to be withdrawn. Interim orders running against defendant no.24 to continue : 3 : to operate till 27th April, 2010. In view of the aforesaid order, Chamber Summons No.429 of 2010 does not survive and is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. If defendant nos. 12 to 16 who have taken out this Chamber Summons wish to institute a substantive suit to protect their interest, they are free to do so. No views are expressed on the merits of the Suit, which can be instituted by defendant nos.12 to 16. Refund of Court fees is granted as per rules. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]