Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: N. M. No.68/2020 Order
MHCC010001672020 Presented on : 06.01.2020
Registered on : 06.01.2020
Decided on : 29.10.2025
Duration : 05 09 23
Years Months Days
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 68/2020
(CNR NO. MHCC010001672020)
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO.4511/2013
Sunset Heights Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. … Plaintiff
Versus
M/s. Akashshine Traders Pvt. Ltd. and another … Defendants
AND
Smt. Sushila Sanjay Jain wd/o. Late Sanjay Jugraj
Jain and others … Respondents
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE, A. C. DAGA
: COURT ROOM NO. 61
DATE : 29.10.2025
Appearances: -
Adv. Jayesh Vyas along with Adv. Kinjal Kakkad for Plaintiff.
Adv. Cyrus Barucha along with Adv. S. Patel i/b Little and Company for
Defendant No.5.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
The instant Notice of Motion is filed by the Plaintiff for
setting aside the Order dated 21.09.2019 passed dismissing the
Chamber Summons No.1489/2016 and for restoration of said Chamber
Summons back to its original file. It is pleaded in the Notice of Motion
that on 21.01.2019 one Mr. Gupta, a member of the Plaintiff who was
attending the Court proceedings on behalf of the Plaintiff was not well
and could not attend the Court. The Ld. Advocate for Plaintiff was held
-- 1 of 4 --
N. M. No.68/2020 ... 2 … Order
up in City Civil Court, Dindoshi and could not reach the Court, resulting
into passing of the dismissing Order.
2. Respondent No.5 contested the Notice of Motion by filing a
Reply and has pleaded that, after filing of the Chamber Summons, 63
adjournments were taken. Plaintiff has not proceeded further with the
Chamber Summons after giving ample opportunity and considering the
absence of the Plaintiff, the Court has dismissed the Chamber Summons
in default. Reasons not just and proper. Hence, prayed for rejection.
3. Heard both sides. The Ld. Advocate for the Respondent
No.5 submitted that record goes to show that not less than 63
adjournments were granted for deciding the Chamber Summons. Still,
the Plaintiff remained absent and has not proceeded with the matter,
resulting into passing of the Order dated 21.09.2019. From the
roznamas, it appears that since the last 3 dates i.e. on 02.08.2019,
26.08.2019 and on 29.09.2019 no one was present for the Plaintiff
which resulted into passing of Order dated 21.09.2019 by this Court.
Prior to it, it was mentioned to the Court that settlement talks are going
on to start and therefore, adjournment was sought.
4. The Record shows that, after filing of the Chamber
Summons from time-to-time, matter was adjourned at the instance
mostly of Plaintiff and sometimes at the instance of the Defendants. The
fact remains that on the given date i.e. 21.09.2019 the person looking
after the matter on behalf of the Plaintiff i.e. Mr. Gupta was not well as
he is pleaded on oath in the Notice of Motion and the Advocate could
not attend because he was occupied in Dindoshi Court, resulted into
passing of the Order.
5. Respondent No.5 has, in Reply, stated that he was not
-- 2 of 4 --
N. M. No.68/2020 ... 3 … Order
aware as to whether Mr. Gupta was attending Court on behalf of the
Plaintiff or that he was not well and he was put to strict proof of that.
Though such a plea is raised, the fact remains that the contentions
made by the Plaintiff are on oath. No reason to disbelieve it. Secondly,
the suit is still pending. No prejudice will be caused to Respondent No.5
in case the suit is decided on merits. For the purpose of deciding all the
issues between all parties on merits, it is essential to set aside the Order
dated 21.09.2019 and to restore back the Chamber Summons
No.1489/2016 to its original file, but for the purpose of delay, the
Respondent No.5 who is contesting the Notice of Motion needs to be
compensated. As such, I pass the following Order: -
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion is allowed in terms of prayer Clause (a) subject
to payment of costs of Rs.3000/- (Rs. Three Thousand Only) to
the Respondent No.5 and thereafter only the Chamber Summons
be restored back at its original number.
2. Costs to be paid on or before the next date, failing which, without
further reference, instant Notice of Motion shall be treated as
rejected.
3. Accordingly, Notice of Motion No.68/2020 stands disposed off.
DATE: - 29.10.2025 (A. C. DAGA)
JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR. MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 29.10.2025
Transcribed on : 29.10.2025
Checked on : 29.10.2025
Signed on : 29.10.2025
-- 3 of 4 --
N. M. No.68/2020 ... 4 … Order
"CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER"
DATE: 29.10.2025, AT 04.12 P. M. Siddhesh S. Shirke
STENOGRAPHER (GRADE-I)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court no.) : SHRI A. C. DAGA, (C. R. NO.
61)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order : 29.10.2025
Judgment/Order signed by the P. O.
on : 29.10.2025
Judgment/Order uploaded on : 29.10.2025
-- 4 of 4 --