Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: 1 TA02.20
IN THE COURT BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GR.BOMBAY
Transfer Application No.02 of 2020
In
Execution Application No.9 of 2019
Ajaay Shyam Jajodia ..Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
& anr. ..Respondents
Coram : H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
M.W. CHANDWANI
Dated : 6th February,2020
(C.R.No.19)
Applicant in-person.
Advocate Mr.M.B. Jadhav for respondent no.1.
Respondent no.2 absent.
O R A L O R D E R
Read application. Heard both the sides.
2 By the present application, the applicant is seeking transfer of
Execution Application no.9 of 2019 alongwith the connected Summary Suit
No.245/18 and Notice of Motion nos.181/19 as well as 2021/19 from C.R. no.4,
City Civil Court, Dindoshi branch to any other court with necessary direction to
dispose this proceeding within reasonable time framed.
-- 1 of 6 --
2 TA02.20
3 Though the notice was served on respondent no.2, he did not
appear. Learned APP appeared on behalf of respondent no.1 and submit that
the State has no concerned with the matter because this suit is between private
parties and submitted to the order of the court.
4 Heard plaintiff in person as well as learned APP for State.
5 Suffice to say that Summary Suit no.245/18 filed by the applicant
came to be decreed ex-parte and the applicant moved Execution Application
no.9/19. The respondent no.2 who appears to be defendant in suit, filed
Notice of Motion for setting aside the ex-parte decree which is pending in C.R.
no.4, Bombay City Civil Court at Dindoshi. Earlier also the applicant had filed
applications for transfer of this proceedings from one court to another. By order
dated 6th June,2019 the application was disposed as rendered infructuous since
the Presiding Officer of C.R. no.5 against whom grievances were made, was
transferred. However, my predecessor requested the concern court to expedite
the hearing of Execution Application No.9/19.
6 It appears that subsequently the Notices of Motion referred above
came to be filed and pending on the file of C.R. no.5. The applicant again
moved an application vide application no.172/19 on the ground that C.R. no.5 is
vacant and therefore, the matter could not be progressed. By order dated 16 th
August,2019 the proceedings were transferred from C.R. no.5 to C.R. no.4.
-- 2 of 6 --
3 TA02.20
Now, by this application, he again made a request to transfer the matter from
C.R. no.4 to any other court with a direction to decide the application within
reasonable time on the ground that the matter could not be taken up for hearing
since long.
7 It is contended that on various occasions for one or the another,
the matter was adjourned. In para 7, the detailed dates of the court proceeding
is mentioned. Perusal of para 7 shows that on two dates in C.R. no.4, the
learned Judge was on leave, therefore, the matter was adjourned to 28/8/18
and on that date, the advocate for respondent no.2 was absent. On 20 th
September,2019 documents were submitted by the parties and matter was
adjourned to 10th October,2019. On 10th October,2019 the applicant filed list of
judgments and legal provisions. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to
14/11/2019. On 14/10/2019 since the applicant was absent when the matter
was called out, and came late the matter was adjourned to 20/12/2019 and on
20/12/2019 also the matter could not been taken up and thereafter the longer
date of Mach,2020 has been given.
8 It is matter of record, hardly, about four months ago, from the date
of this application the matter was transferred from C.R. no.4 on the application
of the applicant. Be that as it may, in argument, the applicant submitted that on
20th December,2019 the court was inclined to take up the matter after hearing of
one matter, presuming that it will be over within short time, but it lasted for long
time therefore, the matter was adjourned. It appears that due to paucity of time,
the matter is not being taken up by the court. No doubt, it is desirable that the
-- 3 of 6 --
4 TA02.20
matter should be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. However, it is
matter of record that the Judge ratio in proportionate to the cases pending in
entire country is very less and every court is heavily burdened. In this scenario,
I do not think, the transfer of this matter again within span of six months to any
other court, would suffice the purpose. The record shows that more than 10
years old cases are pending. Be that as it may, the applicant is struggling to
get the matter disposed of for last more than one year. For that, he has to
shuttle from his home to court . All that this court can do only request to the
concerned court to dispose of the matter as early as possible. Rather in earlier
order, the same request has been made.
9 In view of the above said observations, I proceed to pass the
following order:
O R D E R
1) Transfer Application No.02/2020 stands rejected.
2) The learned Judge is requested to see that matter should be
disposed of at the earliest, if possible within three months from the
next date of hearing.
06/02/2020 (M.W. CHANDWANI)
Principal Judge,
Gr.Bombay.
Dictated on : 06/02/2020
Transcribed on : 06/02/2020
Signed by H.H.J. on : 07/02/2020
-- 4 of 6 --
5 TA02.20
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Stenographer: Mrs.Aruna S. Jayade
Upload date and time: 10/02/2020 (11.40 a.m.)
Name of the Judge H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
Shri M.W. CHANDWANI(C.R.No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 6th February,2020
Order signed by P.O. on 7th February,2020
Order uploaded on 10th February,2020
-- 5 of 6 --
6 TA02.20
-- 6 of 6 --