Full Order Text
Interim Order 1 · 29 Sept 2023 · CNR MHCC010000742020
Order Details: Order below exhibit Pdf Text: CS No.100173 / 2020, Syntel – Knight Order (Exh.8) 1 of 2 Commercial Suit No. 100173 / 2020 Syntel International Vs Knight Frank Property Order below Exhibit 8 (Delivered on this 29th Day of September, 2023) Plaintiff has prayed for conversion of his Regular Suit No.100173 of 2020, into Commercial Suit. 2) Heard Learned counsels, Shri Amit Khairvar, Smt. Swati Chandan, Smt. Divya Patil for Plaintiff and Shri R. U. Saxsena for defendant. 3) Plaintiff has preferred total three Suits for recovery of various amounts. As per plaintiff, out of those three Suits, he got two suits converted into Commercial Suit as Commercial Suit No.100561 / 2021 and Commercial Suit No.562 / 2021. However, third suit i.e. present Regular Suit No.100173 of 2020 remained to be converted. Present suit deals with commercial transaction. Hence, plaintiff is seeking necessary directions for conversion of this suit to a commercial suit. 4) Application is opposed by defendant on ground of maintainability. It is also contended that, if Suit is converted, then parties be directed to appear for pre-institution mediation and defendant be permitted to file additional Written Statement. Conclusion : 5) Plaintiff contended in Suit that, there was Agreement between the parties regarding providing services relating to Management and Information Technology, against which the defendant has defaulted the payment. Hence, it is dispute of commercial nature. Defendant, in its Written Statement, has admitted execution of Agreement for providing services relating to Management and Information Technology. So, prima facie, the dispute pertain to commercial nature. -- 1 of 2 -- CS No.100173 / 2020, Syntel – Knight Order (Exh.8) 2 of 2 6) Suit is filed on 02.01.2020. Thereafter, plaintiff converted other suits, but, took no steps regarding this suit, for as long as three years. Whatever case may be, considering the pleadings of the plaintiff and defendant, then, for proper adjudication of dispute between parties, the application deserves to be allowed. Considering the delay, it would be just and proper to allow the application subject to costs. In given circumstances, costs of ₹.5,000/- will suffice. Hence, following order : ORDER 1. Application at Exh. 8, is allowed, subject to Cost of . ₹ 5,000/- ( . Five Thousand Only). ₹ 2. Plaintiff shall pay cost of . 5,000/- to defendant, by ₹ next date. 3. Thereafter, Registry of this Court shall re-register the Suit in appropriate category and shall assign the Suit to appropriate Court, as per Rules. 4. Plaintiff shall comply Order by 13.10.2023. 5. It is made clear to both plaintiff and defendant that, their pleading, which they have filed before this Court shall be part and parcel of the proceeding before Transferee Court, irrespective of stage and nature of new Suit. After transfer, the Suit shall be subjected to the stage, which is decided by the Transferee Court. 6. Parties be informed about their right to challenge this Order and period of limitation for it. 7. Application Exh. 8 is disposed off, accordingly. 8. Order dictated and pronounced in Open Court. 9. Record of Exhibit 8 shall be part and parcel of the S.C. Suit No. 100173 / 2020. Mumbai Dated : 29.09.2023 (Vijay S. Hingne) District Judge, Court Room No.31 City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS -- 2 of 2 --
