Summary: The Bombay High Court decided against Sabita Rajesh Narang in her request for temporary help in a family argument over the Raheja Group's properties. The court didn't find enough reasons to give her control or management rights over the properties and businesses in question.
The case is about the Raheja family's large real estate business, started by Lachmandas Raheja. After different family arrangements over the years, problems started when Gopal L. Raheja died in 2014. Sabita Rajesh Narang, his daughter, wanted temporary help to manage and control the family's properties, saying she had rights as a family member.
Sabita started a case in 2014, asking for: - Shared management of the Raheja Group's properties and businesses. - A statement saying she owns 25% of the family properties. - A division of these properties among family members.
Sabita's Claim: - Sabita said she deserved a share as a family member under the Hindu Succession Act. - She claimed the family's properties were joint family property that had never been divided.
Defendants' Stand: - The other side, including Sabita's brother Sandeep Gopal Raheja, said the properties had been split up according to a 1992 spoken family agreement. - They argued that Sabita had already gotten a lot in return for her shares.
Judge Milind N. Jadhav decided on January 5, 2026, not to give Sabita the temporary help she wanted. The court found: - No early signs that Sabita was right about her family member rights. - Proof showed that shares and properties were given to other family members with something in return. - Sabita's delay in starting the case made her argument weaker.
"The Plaintiff has not made out any prima facie case for grant of interim reliefs at this stage," the judgment noted.
The denial of temporary help means Sabita can't currently get involved in managing or controlling the Raheja Group's properties. The case will go to trial, where Sabita will need to back up her claims with proof.
