SAMEER L NAGVEKAR Vs. CHANDRAVATI D MANDREKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. G. Teles, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Advocate for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Mr. Shane Dias Sapeco, learned Advocate for respondent nos. 1, 4 to 8 is not present.

(2.) RULE. By consent heard forthwith.

(3.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondent nos. 2 and 3, I am of the considered opinion that the petition is liable to be allowed on the short ground that though the trial Court in the impugned order states that amendment sought is necessary for deciding the real controversy between the parties, no reason has been given to arrive at such a finding in impugned order passed in the suit filed for declaration that inventory proceedings are null and void. The trial Court ought to have given finding as to how amendment sought and the documents sought to be produced are relevant for deciding the real matters in the controversy between the parties. Such an exercise admittedly has not been undertaken by the trial Court. On this ground impugned order is liable to be set aside and it is hereby set aside. Trial Court to decide the application dated 18.12.2010 afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the parties. Needless to mention that all the contentions of the parties are kept open.