D’Souza family property dispute: HC appoints court receiver as joint admin on estate of late hotelier Timothy D’souza

The Bombay HC appointed a court receiver to manage the estate of late hotelier Timothy D’Souza amid ongoing family disputes over properties.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) on Thursday appointed a court receiver as a joint administrator of the estate of late hotelier Timothy D’Souza—who was the president of All India Hotel Federation and died in 2003 without leaving a will.

D’Souza family property dispute: HC appoints court receiver as joint admin on estate of late hotelier Timothy D’souza

After Timothy D’Souza’s death, his properties of considerable magnitude became bone of contention between his children. In 2007, D’Souza’s son Lalit shot at his sister Lorna six times when she objected to his friend’s car being parked in her parking slot at a Cuffe Parade residential apartment, where the siblings lived together amid strain caused by the property dispute. Lorna received injuries in her chest and hand but survived.

The HC on Thursday directed the court receiver to collect information about each of the properties, the persons occupying the properties, managing/operating the businesses and the accounts of the businesses etc. and submit a comprehensive report to the court by January 24, 2025.

A court receiver is a neutral third party appointed by a court to take control of property, supervise liquidation, and distribute proceeds to creditors.

In her plea, Laura stated that immediately after the death of their father in April 2003, Lalit had taken control of all his business establishments and properties, misused the properties and misappropriated the funds.

She said the estate of her late father was of considerable magnitude and, at present, there was nobody to administer the huge estate, and she was not even aware as to what the entire estate consisted of, and who was managing or administering the same.

In September 2021, the high court sentenced Lalit to ten years imprisonment after holding him guilty of an attempt to murder his sister Lorna and since he is incarcerated, it would be improper to allow such a tainted and incompetent person to administer the estate.

Justice Jamadar accepted her argument that the estate, including the restaurant chain named after Timothy’s son Lalit, was required to be overseen properly. “In the facts of the case, having regard to the large number of properties, which include business concerns, it would be naive to believe that the incarceration of the plaintiff does not affect the management and administration of the estate of the deceased,” said the judge.

The court, however, refused to dislodge Lalit from administration of the estate, especially in view of the fact that his late father had named him as the executor of his will. “The testator expresses his utmost confidence in the executor and, ordinarily, such named executor must be allowed to continue to act as the executor and represent the estate of the deceased and also continue to manage the same, so long as the named executor does not betray the trust and confidence,” said the judge.

The court, therefore, appointed the court receiver as joint administrator of the late hotelier’s estate, but with strict instructions not to take possession of any of his 18 immovable properties or interfere with any of the businesses being run from some of the properties.

Properties owned by the D’Souza family

• Five restaurants in Mumbai

• A business centre near BSE

• A three-storey-building named Laura Mansion near Metro cinema

• Timothy building near Metro

• 30 commercial galas at Metro and Fort

• A flat near Metro, 2 duplex flats in Om Sadan at Malabar Hills and two more flats in Lokhandwala in Andheri West

• A hotel in Vashi

• A five-storey mall in Mangalore

• A three-star hotel in Mangalore

• A 10-bedroom colonial style bungalow in Mangalore with a swimming pool in the midst of a coconut plantation