: 1 : rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.25 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 89 OF 2008 Ashok Keshav Karambelkar .. Petitioner/ Plaintiff V/s. Raghunath Keshav Karambelkar .. Caveators/ Defendant ..... Mr.Mukund Padegaonkar a/w. Mr.Shailesh Kumar for the Petitioner/Plaintiff. Mr.Satya Shettigar for the defendant. ..... CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 7th October, 2009. P.C. : Considering the plea raised by the Caveator and more particularly in the affidavit in reply filed to this motion, it is not possible to conclude that the caveat is devoid of any substance or is not maintainable, and therefore, should be rejected. : 2 : 2. Merely because elaborate plea of the Caveator have been placed before the Court subsequently, that by itself without anything more, would not entitle the petitioner/plaintiff to seek dismissal of the caveat. Notice of motion is therefore, without any merit and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, the dismissal of the Motion shall not be construed as acceptance of the version of the Caveator or the plaintiff, and all the pleas of both the sides as to the genuineness of Will are kept open. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)