MANEK DARA SUKHADWALLA Vs. SHERNAZ FAROUKH LAWYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT . By consent appeal taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) COUNSEL for parties concluded arguments on 6th May 2014 after which at the request of both parties time was granted upto 9th June 2014 to enable them to file written submissions. Written submissions were accordingly filed by both sides. The respondents have sought to rely upon two judgments in their written submissions which they have clarified were not cited during oral arguments. Since the appellants have not had the benefit of addressing the Court on these two judgments we are not taking them into consideration. More so because they are not crucial to any of the matters in issue before us.

(3.) AT the time, the deceased had a trusted domestic servant one 'Shaku' who expired in April, 2011 after which the appellant is believed to have engaged one domestic help Sushila to reside along with the deceased. The appellant along with the said Doodhmal and Pandey started exercising complete dominion over the deceased and the properties of deceased who was suffering from age related infirmities. Apparently, the appellant started staying with the deceased and under the guise of assisting the deceased and along with Doodhmal and Pandey, the appellant began controlling the property and credits of the deceased.