A division bench of justices VM Kanade and Revati Mohite Dhere said: "An attempt should be made for mediation. Both the parties should attempt to have cordial relations."
The Bombay High Court on Friday suggested that the dispute over property between Vijaypat Singhania, chairman emeritus of Raymond Group, and his four grand-children be resolved amicably through mediation.
A division bench of justices VM Kanade and Revati Mohite Dhere said: "An attempt should be made for mediation. Both the parties should attempt to have cordial relations."
The bench made this suggestion while hearing an appeal filed by the grandchildren challenging a single court of passed on August 2015, refusing any interim relief to them, directions were sought by them against Singhania not to deal with any property included in the 1998 Family Settlement, entered between him and his estranged son, Madhupati Singhania.
The petitioners — Raivathari (18), Ananya (29), Rasaalika (26) and Tarini (20) — are the children of Vijaypat's estranged elder son Madhupati, who left the Mumbai family home 17 years ago with his wife Anuradha, and settled in Singapore. Madhupati's children had filed the suit in February last year, staking claim to "their share of the family properties".
The grandchildren had sought directions restraining any further transactions in assets worth over Rs1,000 crore. These include assets listed in the Family Settlement on 1998, about 2 lakh shares of the flagship company Raymonds Ltd which was in Madhupati's name, Madhupati's 1/24th share in JK Bankers, the company from where the entire business started and a few assets listed in the grandchildren's own name.
The grandchildren, in their suit, have argued that as per the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, the father could not have dealt in any property in his minor kids' names without a court order. However, Singhania's counsel has opposed this claim on the ground that if the property was joint family property, then a minor's consent or a court order is not required to deal with the "undivided property".
He added that the grandchildren had sought to challenge the outcome of a document without offering to surrender the benefits received by them under that document. Further, there has been a delay of over 11 years in filing the case thus it was time-barred. Moreover, it also seemed to be an inspired litigation done by the parents through their children. The court has now posted the matter for final hearing on April 6.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Bombay High Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}