: 1 : cst-84-11=.sxw USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY TESTAMENTARY & INTESTATE JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 84 OF 2011 IN TESTAMENTARY PETITION NO. 1043 OF 2010 Dilip Kantilal Kapadia .. Petitioner v/s. Manish Kantilal Kapadia .. Caveator ......... Ms. Alpana Ghone i/b M/s. Desai & Diwanji for the petitioner Ms. Rhia Marshall i/b Wadia Gandhy & Co. for the caveator ......... CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J DATE : 16th AUGUST, 2011. P.C. : 1. This chamber summons is taken out by the caveator for condonation of delay in filing affidavit in support of the caveat. The citation was served upon the caveator on 21st April, 2011. The caveat was filed on 25th April, 2011 and affidavit in support of the caveat was filed on 19th June, 2011. These facts are not disputed. A copy of the affidavit in reply to the present chamber summons and rejoinder thereof is made available to the Court. Same is taken on record as the originals are not before the Court. : 2 : cst-84-11=.sxw 2. I have heard learned Counsel on both sides. In the normal course, it was necessary for the caveator to explain as to why there was a delay of 37 days in filing the caveat. The only reason given in the affidavit in support of the caveat at paragraph 5 is the absence of caveator from India as the caveator had to go out of India for person reasons. The averments in paragraph 5 and 6 are absolutely of a general nature and do not indicate as to when the caveator left India and when he came back. 3. In the normal course, the Court could have been justified in dismissing this chamber summons. However, looking to the quantum of delay merely 37 days, I am of the view that the chamber summons can be granted by directing to the caveator to pay to plaintiff quantified cost of Rs.20,000/- on or before 15th September, 2011. If the cost are not paid on or before 15th September, 2011, affidavit in support of the caveat shall not be read. Chamber summons is disposed of accordingly. (R.Y.GANOO, J.)