"After fighting for over three decades for a share in ancestral properties, three branches of the Singhania family told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that they had amicably settled the dispute by honouring and implementing the decision of the arbitrator who had in 2008 divided the assets in three parts. 


Three Singhania family groups from Mumbai, Kolkata and Kanpur have been locked in a prolonged litigation over shares in the property despite the arbitration award. As per the award, the Kanpur group was to hand over possession of four properties to Raymond owner Vijaypat Singhania-led Mumbai group which, in turn, was to hand over the Juhu bungalow to the Kolkata group. But Vijaypat Singhania had refused to part with the bungalow saying he had not got his share from the Kanpur group," reported the Times of India.

Advocate on record (AOR) Shohit Chaudhry acted for the respondents Veena Devi Singhania, Anant Singhania and Akshaypat Singhania. 

Khaitan & Co Kolkata partner Nandini Khaitan, Delhi partner Sanjeev Kapoor and principal associate Sahil Narang briefed senior advocate Dinyar Madon for the respondents Hari Shankar Singhania, Bharat Hari Singhania, Raghupati Singhania, Vinita Singhania, Anshuman Singhania, Srivats Singhania.

AOR Shirish Kumar Misra acted for the remaining Singhanias on the defending side, including Sushila Singhania and Yadhupati Singhania.

Wadia Ghandy partners Kunal Vajani, Suraj Juneja and Bindi Girish Dave with advocate Aman Raj Gandhi briefed senior advocate Kapil Sibal for Vijayapat Singhania's son Gautam Singhania, the petitioner.

Supreme Court justices Dipak Misra and AM Khanwilkar ordered that out of Rs 46.11 crore deposited by the disputing families with the Bombay high court, the petitioner and other partners of the Bombay group will be entitled to Rs 23.4 crore, while eight of the respondents represented by Misra and Chaudhry will be entitled to Rs 22.71 crore. Hari Shankar Singhania and the other five respondents represented by Khaitan had deposited Rs 20 crore with the high court and they would be entitled to a refund, and additionally the other eight respondents' deposit of Rs 10 crore will also be refunded to them.

[documentcloud https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3891449-Order-05-07-2017-Revised.html Read order]
Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
(alt+shift+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.
refresh Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments. Sort chronologically
1
Show?
Like +1 Object -0 700 10 Jul 17, 13:27
so that unprecedented Sunday hearing in SC to resolve this family dispute did work in the end!
Reply Report to LI

refreshSort chronologically Filter out low-rated comments. Show all comments.