Solve property row via mediation: HC to Singhania's family

The Bombay High Court has asked Dr Vijaypat Singhania, the Chairman-Emeritus of Raymond Group, and his four grandchildren to settle a property dispute amicably through mediation.
"An attempt should be made by both sides to settle the dispute by mediation. Both parties should attempt to have cordial relations," observed a bench of justices V M Kanade and Reveti Mohite Dere on February 5.
The judges were hearing an appeal filed by four grandchildren of Vijaypat Singhania against a single judge order of August, 2015 of the Bombay High Court, that refused interim relief to them in a suit they filed seeking share in the family property.

The appellants had sought a direction to Vijaypat Singhania to not deal with any property included in the 1998 family settlement, which he and his estranged son Madhupati Singhania had entered in.
The appellants - Raivathari (18), Ananya (29), Rasaalika (26) and Tarini (20) - are children of Madhupati Singhania, who left the family's Mumbai home 17 years ago along with his wife Anuradha, and settled in Singapore.
Madhupati Singhania's children had filed the suit in February, 2015, staking claim to "their share of the family property".

They sought a direction from the High Court restraining any further transactions in the family assets, estimated at over Rs 1,000 crore.

These assets include those listed in the family settlement of 1998, about two lakh shares of the flagship company Raymond Ltd which were in Madhupati Singhania's name, Madhupati's 1/24th share in JK Bankers, the company from where the entire business started, and a few other assets listed in the grand children's own name.
The appellants argued in the suit that as per the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, Vijaypat Singhania could not have dealt in any property registered in the name of his minor kids without a court order.
However, Vijaypat Singhania's counsel opposed their plea on the grounds that if the property was a joint family property, then a minor's consent or a court order is not required to deal with the "undivided property".

The court has posted the matter for final hearing on April 6.