Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM NO.125/2019 SUIT 1149/18 1
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.125 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1149 of 2018
(CNR NO.: MHCC010003402019)
M/s.Kantilal Sanghavi & Co.
at 3rd floor, Union Cooperative
Insurance Building,23,
Pherozeshah Mehta Road,
Mumbai400001. ...Plaintiff
Versus
1. United Bank of India, having its Registered office
at 11 Hemanta Basu Sarani, Kolkata700001 in 1972
and having its other Branch at, 25, Sir P.M.Road,
Fort, Mumbai 400 001.
2. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd.
7th floor, Plot No.C26/27,
Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East,
Mumbai400051.
3. M/s.Tianjin Red Triangle International Trading Co.Ltd.
At No.3369 Bohai 10Road,
Harbour, Economic Zone Binhai New Area
(Tanggu), Tianjin 3000452, China. ...Defendants
Appearances:
Advocate Mr.Rajeshwar for the Plaintiff.
Advocate Ms.Yasmin Sarang for Defendant No.1.
Advoate Ms.Mayuri Kale for Defendant No.2.
-- 1 of 4 --
NM NO.125/2019 SUIT 1149/18 2
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI.M.S.LONE
(C.R.NO.28)
DATE : 19TH AUGUST 2019
ORDER
This is Notice of motion for condonation of delay for 30 days to
file appearance.
2. Heard Ld.counsel for defendant and Ld.counsel for plaintiff.
3. From the material on record following points come for my
determination and my findings with reasons are as follows:
POINTS FINDINGS
1.Whether there is sufficient cause
to condone the delay of 30 days to
file appearance?
Yes
2. What order ? As per final order
REASONS
AS TO POINT NOS.1 &2.
4. The Ld.counsel for defendant No.1 has submitted that due to
festival vacations and due to pending workload the defendants were
unable to appoint their advocate in time. After appointment of advocate
on same day they have tendered vakalatnama to their advocate. In this
process there was delay in filing appearance therefore, this application.
5. The Ld.counsel for plaintiff has replied to this application and had
-- 2 of 4 --
NM NO.125/2019 SUIT 1149/18 3
stated that deliberately the vakalatnama is not filed within time by the
defendant No.1 therefore, their application be rejected.
6. From the record it can be seen that there is delay of 30 days to
file vakalatnama on behalf of defendant. The defendant has taken
ground of workload. Without taking any harsh view and as defendant
No.1 is interested to contest this suit it will be proper to give defendant
No.1 a fair chance. The delay can be compensated. Therefore, point No.
1 is answered as 'Yes' and following order is passed.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.125 of 2019 is allowed.
2. The delay of 30 days to file appearance of defendant No.1 is
condoned subject to cost of Rs.1000/(Rs.One Thousand only) to be
paid to plaintiff.
3. On payment of cost, vakalatnama shall be taken on record.
4. Notice of Motion No.125 of 2019 is disposed of accordingly.
(M.S.LONE)
Judge,
Date:19/08/2019 City Civil Court,Gr. Bombay
Dictated on : 19/08/2019
Transcribed on : 23/08/2019
Signed on : 31/08/2019
-- 3 of 4 --
NM NO.125/2019 SUIT 1149/18 4
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
31/08/2019 AT 5.15p.m. Mrs.J.V.Pawar
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ Shri.M.S.Lone
(C.R.NO.28)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
19/08/2019
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 31/08/2019
Judgment/Order uploaded on 31/08/2019
-- 4 of 4 --