Bombay High Court
Mr. Bharat Kantilal Dalal vs Mr. Girdharlal Nathubhai Dalal ... on 18 December, 2014
Bench: R.S. Dalvi
(1) CHS 243/14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Amk
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 243 OF 2014
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 1036 OF 2013
IN
ARBITRATION AWARD DATED 12th JULY, 2010
Mr. Bharat Kantilal Dalal .. Applicant
In the matter between
Mr. Bharat Kantilal Dalal .. Claimant
Vs.
Mr. Girdharlal Nathubhai Dalal & Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. M. P. S. Rao, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Pranav Sampat, Mr. Sachin
Mandlik, Ms. Parvathi Parkot i/b Khaitan & Co. for the Applicant/Claimant.
Mr. Haresh Jagtiyani, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. Yashpal Jain, Ms. Vandana
Mehta, Mr. Nikhil Sansare for the Respondents.
CORAM : MRS. ROSHAN DALVI, J.
Date of reserving the Order : 1 st
DECEMBER, 2014.
Date of pronouncing the Order : 18 th
DECEMBER, 2014.
ORDER
1. The claimant/award holder has taken out this application for
executing the award against the estate of the judgment debtor, since
deceased. This Chamber Summons is taken out essentially against
respondent No.1, who claims to be the executor, under a will of the
deceased which is yet unprobated and for which yet an application for
probate has not been filed.
2. The application is also upon notice under Order 21 Rule 22 of
the CPC as the award has been passed more than 2 years prior to this
(2) CHS 243/14
application.
3. The applicant/claimant has himself set out details of various
movable and immovable properties in prayer (b) of the application. The
applicant has sought specific particulars in respect of the ancestral
property, cash, jewellery, bank accounts, lockers, shares, securities,
deposits, units etc. owned and held by the judgment debtors since
deceased singly or jointly at the time of the award or his demise. The
applicant has required particulars of the business of the deceased, the
status of immovable properties of the deceased, the shares, securities,
deposits held by him including the share holding in one specific company
being Auro Mira Services Pvt. Ltd. The applicant has sought statement of
the banks, fixed deposits, mutual funds, insurance policies of th deceased.
The applicant has further claimed details of trust established by the
deceased specifically in British Virgin Island, Singapore and New Jersey.
The applicant has sought particulars of the assets and properties of the
deceased received by the respondents or any firms, companies or trusts
controlled by the respondents from the deceased himself or through his
companies, firms and trusts.
4. The applicant has annexed a schedule to the Chamber
Summons setting out various properties known to him and has sought
further particulars with regard to the specific items as aforesaid.
5. Consequently the applicant has specifically set out the ambit of
the particulars required. The applicant has only claimed the particulars of
the properties of the deceased at the time of the award and at the time of
his death (which was 2 ½ years after the award was passed) and which
forms the part of the estate of the deceased.
(3) CHS 243/14
6. Since respondent No.1 claims to be the executor of such estate,
he is required to provide the aforesaid particulars under the provisions of
Order 21 Rule 41 of the CPC. The other respondents are not award debtors
and need not provide the particulars called for.
7. Respondent No.1 has filed an affidavit giving details of certain
movable and immovable properties. Most of the properties have been
detailed by the applicant/claimant himself. The part of the affidavit is in
the nature of explaining how the assets and properties detailed by the
claimant do not form a part of the estate of the deceased. That is not the
purport or ambit of an application under Order 21 Rule 41 of the CPC. Be
that as it may, it is for the applicant/claimant to proceed in execution by
attachment or otherwise of the properties which attachment shall be
considered at appropriate time upon application made in accordance with
law. In para 4 of the affidavit of respondent No.1 he has claimed that he is
in the process of getting information and familarizing himself with the
assets and liabilities of the deceased award debtor. The deceased died on
08.03.2013. The affidavit was made on 1st November, 2013. The
particulars sought are not obtained until now.
8. The applicant has provided details of certain bank account and
FDRs without substantiating documents annexed to his affidavit-in-reply.
The applicant must produce before the Court all the necessary documents
including the copies of the FDRs as also the bank statement.
9. Though it is seen that only the known properties are stated in
the affidavit-in-reply of respondent No.1, except perhaps the details of
certain bank accounts, at present further details are not called upon as a
(4) CHS 243/14
large of the estate of the deceased has been known to the
applicant/claimant/award holder and is shown by himself.
10. Hence the following order:
(a) The notice under Order 21 Rule 22 of the CPC to proceed in
execution of the award is granted as the claimant/award holder has
not yet been provided full knowledge and information of the entire
estate of the award debtor.
(b) The applicant/claimant shall be entitled to proceed in
execution in accordance with law.
(c)
If the award stands satisfied upon the aforesaid particulars, no
further directions would be required to be passed for further
properties of the award debtor, since deceased, in respect of his
estate.
(d) If, however, the award still remains unsatisfied after
proceeding in execution in respect of the known properties; movable
and immovable, of the deceased award debtor, further particulars
may be sought by the applicant/claimant in a further such
application.
(e) The Chamber Summons is disposed of in terms of the above
directions.
(ROSHAN DALVI J.)
