Jayadev was never a beneficiary: Witness
Late Shiv Sena supremo Bal Thackeray never made his estranged son Jayadev a beneficiary in any of the eight or nine wills he had executed, indicated the statement made by advocate Flanian D’Souza in the court on Friday. D’Souza is the first witness in the property dispute case, and had drafted all of Thackeray’s wills along, with his senior Jerome Saldanha.
Jayadev’s lawyer advocate Seema Sirnaik asked D’Souza if Thackeray had made any changes, such as adding or deleting names of beneficiaries, in any of the wills. D’Souza replied saying, “I do not recollect him having deleted any beneficiary.”
In the latest will executed on December 13, 2011, Jayadev’s name doesn’t feature at all. If Thackeray didn’t delete any names in the last will, it implies Jayadev’s name never featured in any of the wills.
“Repercussions of this case are not limited just to this court room. They go well beyond this,” observed Justice Patel. Uddhav’s lawyer Advocate Rajesh Shah, however, was not able to contact him. The court has now asked the brothers to return on December 17.
D’Souza also told the court that the entire material put in the latest will was finalised in his meetings with Thackeray in November 2011. He also said Thackeray used to destroy all the notings and drafts.
In a reply to another question, D’Souza said during the will-related meetings, whenever he entered Thackeray’s bedroom on the second floor of the bungalow, he used be on the bed and D’Souza used to sit in a chair next to the bed.
Earlier, Jayadev’s advocate tried pointing out some discrepancies in the Notary Register entries made by Saldanha. According to D’Souza’s deposition, the order in which will and affidavits were signed was – Uddhav Thackeray, Ravindra Mhatre, Anil Parab, late Adhik Shirodkar, Shashi Prabhu, Dr Jalil Parkar and D’Souza himself. The Notary Register entries, however, were in a different order. The advocate said that this was because the people who had signed the relevant documents did not do so in front of Saldanha, as per the procedure. D’Souza, however, denied it.
Jayadev’s lawyer advocate Seema Sirnaik asked D’Souza if Thackeray had made any changes, such as adding or deleting names of beneficiaries, in any of the wills. D’Souza replied saying, “I do not recollect him having deleted any beneficiary.”
In the latest will executed on December 13, 2011, Jayadev’s name doesn’t feature at all. If Thackeray didn’t delete any names in the last will, it implies Jayadev’s name never featured in any of the wills.
Meanwhile, Justice Gautam Patel advised the two warring brothers—Jayadev and Uddhav—to explore the option of arriving at an amicable settlement. The court gave half an hour’s time to the brothers’ advocates to talk to their respective clients over the phone and tell the court if they were willing to consider the suggestion.
“Repercussions of this case are not limited just to this court room. They go well beyond this,” observed Justice Patel. Uddhav’s lawyer Advocate Rajesh Shah, however, was not able to contact him. The court has now asked the brothers to return on December 17.
D’Souza also told the court that the entire material put in the latest will was finalised in his meetings with Thackeray in November 2011. He also said Thackeray used to destroy all the notings and drafts.
In a reply to another question, D’Souza said during the will-related meetings, whenever he entered Thackeray’s bedroom on the second floor of the bungalow, he used be on the bed and D’Souza used to sit in a chair next to the bed.
Earlier, Jayadev’s advocate tried pointing out some discrepancies in the Notary Register entries made by Saldanha. According to D’Souza’s deposition, the order in which will and affidavits were signed was – Uddhav Thackeray, Ravindra Mhatre, Anil Parab, late Adhik Shirodkar, Shashi Prabhu, Dr Jalil Parkar and D’Souza himself. The Notary Register entries, however, were in a different order. The advocate said that this was because the people who had signed the relevant documents did not do so in front of Saldanha, as per the procedure. D’Souza, however, denied it.
GALLERIES View more photos