JAMSHEED KANGA Vs. PARSI PUNCHAYETFUNDS AND PROPERTIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 07/01/2010, an application was made by Plaintiffs for granting an ad-interim relief in the Originating Summons. However, by consent of parties, it was agreed that all issues including preliminary issue raised by Defendants should be decided finally and, accordingly, the matter was fixed on 15/02/2010 at 3.00 p.m. for final hearing of the Originating Summons along with other preliminary objections raised by Defendants.

(2.) However, on 15/02/2010, Counsel for Defendant Nos. 2 to 8 sought further time to file reply which was vehemently opposed by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Plaintiffs. He revived his application for ad-interim relief and submitted that the question of granting or refusing adinterim relief was not taken into consideration on the earlier date since both the parties had agreed that the matter should be finally decided on 15/02/2010. He, however, submitted that if Defendants wanted further time to file their reply, in that event, he may be permitted to revive his application for ad-interim relief.

(3.) This Court, however, granted two week's time to Defendant Nos. 2 to 8 to file their reply and fixed the matter for final hearing on 02/03/2010 at 3.00 p.m. Accordingly, I have heard the parties. During the course of hearing, Chamber Summons has been filed by one Framroze Mirza - applicant. The relief claimed by him in the Chamber Summons is that his affidavit in support should be taken on record and he should be excluded from the present proceedings.