SANTOSH GHANSHYAMDAS BIYANI Vs. HARSHAD S. MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff seeks a decree against the original 1st defendant-Harshad Mehta, now represented by legal heirs - defendant nos.1A to 1C and defendant nos.[1.1.1] to [1.1.4], being legal heirs of deceased defendant no.1B-Rasila Mehta.

(2.) Two other similar Suits have been filed by other family members of the plaintiff. Evidence to some extent is common.

(3.) The plaint proceeds on the basis that one Ramesh G. Biyani, a member of the plaintiff's family and engaged in dealing in stocks and shares by way of investment, being familiar with the business of stocks, was known to several brokers. Ramesh Biyani transacted business for the family inter alia through original defendant no.1-Harshad S. Mehta (hereinafter referred to as "HSM"). The suit shares are shares of defendant no.2-company and hence defendant no.2 has been impleaded. HSM died on 31/12/2001 and legal heirs have since been brought on record. The plaintiff claims that on 19/12/1990, plaintiff through Ramesh Biyani handed over and entrusted 11,500 shares of defendant no.2-company, belonging to the members of the plaintiff's family, to HSM. Ramesh Biyani, acting as an agent of the plaintiff and other members of the family, was given a memo signed by HSM acknowledging receipt of the shares. According to the plaintiff, the shares at item nos.4 and 6 to 12 in the said acknowledgment, constituting 5,350 shares, were thus handed over to HSM for the purposes of being sold. Shortly thereafter, HSM apparently advised the plaintiff through Ramesh Biyani that the gulf war, which was then raging, would soon end and as a result therefore the prices of the 2nd defendant's shares were bound to rise. HSM therefore did not sell the shares, as required, but kept holding on to them. Despite repeated demands by the plaintiff through Ramesh Biyani, these shares were not sold.