Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 Notice of Motion No.136/19
in Summary Suit No.4612/2010
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
Notice of Motion No.136 of 2019
(CNR NO. MH CC010003742019)
In
SUMMARY SUIT NO.4612 OF 2010
(High Court Summary Suit No.2787 of 2010)
Dayaram Vallaram Choudhary
Age : 40 years, Occupation : Business
Proprietor of M/s. Rameshwar Metal Corporation
at 37/10 Ardeshir Dady Lane, Chandralok Building,
Near Alankar Cinema, Mumbai – 400 004. ….Plaintiff
V/s.
1) Nuwave Technology Pvt. Ltd
2) Rohit B. Gupta
Director of M/s. Nuwave Technology Pvt. Ltd.
Both having office address at 6, Alpha, 02nd Floor,
Peddar Road, Mumbai 400 026. ....Defendants
Appearance:
Mr. S.R. Morya, Advocate for the Plaintiff.
Mr. Paras N. Vira, Advocate for the defendants
.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
JAYSHRI R. PULATE
Adhoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay
(C.R.NO.40)
DATE : 18 th October, 2019.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 Notice of Motion No.136/19
in Summary Suit No.4612/2010
ORDER
1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by defendants for framing
additional issue as under :
Does the plaintiff proves that defendants issued a letter dated
10.08.2009, acknowledging the receipt of material and issued
two post dated cheques Nos.225406 dated 25.01.2010 and
225407 dated 20.01.2010 for Rs.13,95,065/ each both
drawn on HSBC Bank Limited, Pedder Road, Mumbai – 400
026 branch ?
To this notice of motion plaintiff failed to filed reply. However,
written notes of arguments are filed on record on behalf of plaintiff.
2. Heard both sides. After conclusion of evidence of both
parties suit was proceeded for final argument and thereafter present
notice of motion is filed for framing additional issue.
3. Learned Advocate for defendant submitted that in para
no.11 to 13, the defendants have specifically denied that the letter dated
10.08.2019 acknowledging alleged liability and issued two post dated
cheques. Therefore, the proposed issue is required to be framed as
additional issue.
Per contra, the recitals of written note of arguments on behalf of
plaintiff reflects that present notice of motion is filed with sole intention
to delay and prolong the hearing at the fag end of the trial and requested
to be dismissed. The claim of the plaintiff is based on the invoices
annexed with the plaint and not on cheqeus. Therefore, learned
Advocate for plaintiff prayed that notice of motion be dismissed.
-- 2 of 4 --
3 Notice of Motion No.136/19
in Summary Suit No.4612/2010
4. Perused the record, notice of motion and considered the
submissions advanced by both the learned Advocates. On perusal of the
plaint, it is noticed that the plaintiff's claim is based on the various
invoices annexed with the plaint. It is the contention of defendant that
the plaintiff has forged a letter dated 10.08.2019 and two disputed
cheques. Therefore, burden of proving said issue is casted on defendant
as per issue No.2 framed at Exh6. Therefore, considering the fact that
evidence of both the parties is concluded and the issues are framed at
Exh6, I am of the opinion, that notice of motion is devoid of merit and
required to be dismissed. Resultantly, I pass following order. :
ORDER
Notice of Motion No.136/2018, is dismissed and disposed off
accordingly.
(Jayshri R. Pulate)
Adhoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay
Date : 18/10/2019
Dictated on : 18.10.2019
Transcribed on : 22.10.2019
Signed on : 24.10.2019
-- 3 of 4 --
4 Notice of Motion No.136/19
in Summary Suit No.4612/2010
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE TIME STENOGRAPHER NAME
24.10.2019 4.45 p.m. Ms. Ujwala J. Bhagat.
Name of the Judge H.H.J. Jayshri R. Pulate.
Adhoc Judge.
(Court Room No.40)
Date of pronouncement of Order 18.10.2019
Order signed by P.O. on 24.10.2019
Order uploaded on 24.10.2019
-- 4 of 4 --