RADHIKA KAMAL MIRANI ALIAS RASHMI VIJAY RIJHWANI vs NISHA PURSHOTTAM MIRANI

Judgment text excerpt

wp-16611-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.16611 OF 2024 Radhika Kamal Mirani VISHAL @ Rashmi Vijay Rijhwani ...Petitioner SUBHASH PAREKAR vs. Digitally signed Nisha Purshotam Mirani ...Respondent by VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2025.03.27 19:42:29 +0530 Mrs. Sushma Singh a/w. Ms. Sayali Sawant, for the Petitioner. Mr. Jagdish Choudhary i/b. M/s.Raj Legal, for the Respondent. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : MARCH 27, 2025 JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of the counsel for the parties, heard finally. 2. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assails the legality, propriety and correctness of an order passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court in Summons For Judgment No. 130 of 2023 in Summary Suit No. 125 of 2023 whereby leave to defend the suit was granted to the defendant subject to the condition of deposit of 25% of the principal amount of the suit claim. 3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the background facts leading to this petition can be stated as under. 4. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the parties are hereinafter referred to in the capacity in which they are arrayed before the City Civil Court. Vishal Parekar, PS ...1 wp-16611-2024.doc 5. The plaintiff is the mother-in-law of the defendant. The plaintiff has instituted the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 13,23,000/- which she has allegedly lent to the defendant so as to facilitate her to subscribe to the share capital of Kamya Forex and Gold India Private Limited (the company) floated by her son Kamal Miran, the husband of the defendant. Interestingly, the mother in law has instituted the suit through her son who is stated to be her constituted attorney. 6. Beneath the appare