1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 49 OF 2006 IN PETITION NO. 94 OF 2005 Smt. Jineshwari Hasmukhlal Javeri. ... Deceased. Shri Rajkumar L. Agathia. ... Plaintiff. V/s. Smt. Mukul H. Ghia & Anr. ... Defendants/ Caveators. Ms. K.C. Nichani for the Plaintiff. Mr. Bharat Vaishnawa i/b. Bharat Vaishnawa & Co. for Caveator No.1 Ms. Vaishali Chaudhary and Heena Desai for Caveatrix Nilima Bhansali. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 2nd DECEMBER 2009. P.C. :- The Plaintiff’s Advocate sought adjournment on the last occasion to take written instructions as it was orally informed by the Plaintiff that he does not wish to proceed with this Petition/Suit. Today, Ms. Nichani, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff hands over the written instructions from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff desires to withdraw the Probate Petition. The Probate Petition is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed as such. 2. There is a Chamber Summons by an Applicant, who seeks to be substituted as a Plaintiff in place of the Original 2 Plaintiff. Since the Petition which was filed by the Original Plaintiff was contested by the Caveator, the matter was converted into a contested proceeding/suit. Now, the contest as between the Original Plaintiff and the Caveator is not there. Therefore, the Applicant’s remedy is to file the substantive Petition and nothing prevents him/her in law from instituting such substantive proceedings and claiming the relief that is sought in the present Petition which is withdrawn. All contentions in that behalf of both sides are kept open. While allowing the Plaintiff to withdraw the Suit, the liberty is granted to the Applicant to institute independent proceedings. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)