1 chs.233.09-s.3385.1986.sxw mnm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 233 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 3385 OF 1986 Manocher Ebrahim Shirazi & Ors. ...Plaintiffs Vs. Suresh L. Raheja & Ors. ...Defendants Ms. Punita Soni i/b. Bilawala & Co., for the Plaintiffs Mr. C.S. Balsara with Ms. Sanida Vedpathak i/b. R.D. Sethna & Co., for the Defendant No.1 Mr. C.S. Balsara with Mr. Avinash Joshi i/b. Mulla & Mulla for Defendant Nos. 2 to 4. CORAM : SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. DATED : 15TH APRIL, 2011 P.C. : 1. The parties are shia Muslims. The main challenge in the suit is regarding the right of pre-emption claimed by the Plaintiffs upon the sale of a property of the family by the Defendants. The Plaintiffs have also challenged the constitutional validity of the provisions applicable to the parties with regard to the right of pre-emption. The fact that the parties are shias governed by Muslim Law having the right of pre-emption is averred in para 10 of the plaint. The fact that the right of pre-emption is not available to the parties and the denial of the Plaintiffs’ right of pre-emption is averred in para 13 of the written statement of 2 chs.233.09-s.3385.1986.sxw Defendants 2 to 4. That paragraph further shows the offer made by the Defendants to the Plaintiffs to sell their share and the fact that the Plaintiffs declined the offer. The issues which have been framed are upon the right of pre-emption and whether the right is discriminatory or otherwise. The question of law relating to the right of pre-emption amongst shia Muslims is, therefore, to be considered. Hence further amendments to the written statement are not required. Hence there shall be no order on the Chamber Summons. 2. Issues are already framed. There is no issue relating to the question of fact to be decided because, the relationship between the parties is admitted. The property which is in dispute is admitted and the fact of the sale is also admitted. Only the consequence of the sale shall have to be decided. The issues are, therefore, issues on law. Unless the Plaintiffs specifically show any question of fact on any affidavit of examination-in- chief no evidence will be required. 3. The suit is adjourned to 19 th April 2011. First on board for affidavit of examination-in-chief, if required, along with the affidavit of documents, if any, of the Plaintiffs or for arguments on the questionS of law. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)