Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 297/20 in 2684/14
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 297/2020
(CNR No.MHCC010006902020)
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2684/2014
1. Agio Pharmaceutical Ltd.
2. Mr. Madhusudan Ruia
3. Mr. Pankaj Nandkishor Chandak
4. Mr. Sunil Rajaram Rane ...Applicants/Ori.
Defendants
In the matter between ;
Mr Bharat K. Mehta .. Plaintiff
Versus
1. Agio Pharmaceutical Ltd.
2. Mr. Madhusudan Ruia
3. Mr. Pankaj Nandkishor Chandak
4. Mr. Sunil Rajaram Rane .. Defendants.
Appearances :
Adv. Amarsingh Chauhan i/b Rahul Karnik for plaintiff.
Adv. Siddharth Sharma for defendant nos.1 to 4.
Adv. Sunil More for defendant nos. 5 to 9.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
Additional Judge
CR No. : 03
Date : 11.10.2021.
ORDER
1. Defendants no.1 to 4 have field instant Notice of Motion for
recalling 'no cross' order dated 12.11.2018.
2. It is contended by the defendants that, the plaintiff has
filed false and frivolous Suit to which they have filed their WS. Their
advocate made them understand that, they will be informed whenever
required. It was also informed by their advocate that in order to reach
the matter at evidence stage, it will take time. He assured the
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM 297/20 in 2684/14
defendants that, he will contact whenever their presence would be
required in the court. Therefore, the defendants relied on the version of
their advocate and waited for his communication.
3. It is further contended that, when they did not receive any
communication from the side of their advocate for a considerable time,
they approached their advocate. But, they did not get satisfactory
answers and found that, their advocate was avoiding to answer their
queries. Therefore, they have engaged another advocate to inspect the
proceeding.
4. It is contended that, on 1.11.2019, they have approached
another advocate, who immediately, on their instructions, on
19.11.2019 took inspection of the record. Thereupon, it was revealed
that, their advocate was absent to crossexamine the plaintiff's witness
and therefore, no crossexamination was conducted on behalf of the
defendants. Therefore, it is contended that, due to fault of advocate the
defendants should not be suffered. Therefore, the defendants may be
allowed to crossexamine the plaintiff's witness, in the interest of
justice.
5. The Motion is opposed by the plaintiff by filing say
overleaf. Heard both sides. Perused Motion, say as well as Roznama. It
appears that, the plaintiff tendered its evidence in lieu of Examination
inchief on 17.3.2017. The copy of compilation was duly served to the
defendants. Thereafter advocate Mr.Yash Vardhan was appearing for
the defendant no.1 to 4. On 7.7.2018, documents were exhibited but
advocate of the defendant nos.1 to 4 was absent. Thereafter, the matter
was posted on 12.11.2018. On that day, advocate of the defendant
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM 297/20 in 2684/14
nos.5 to 9 completed their crossexamination. On that day, 'no cross'
order was not passed and the matter was simply adjourned for further
evidence.
6. On 13.12.2018, the plaintiff filed evidence closure pursis.
Thus, it appears that, the plaintiff tendered closure pursis prior to
passing of 'no cross' order. No doubt, the attitude of defendant's
advocate do not deserve any leniency.
7. It appears that, since 2018, the matter is prolonged only
due to defendant nos.1 to 4. I am of the view that, the litigation should
be decided on its merits. Therefore, defendants should be given a
chance to crossexamine the plaintiff's witness. Thus, I proceed to pass
following order :
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 297/2020 is hereby allowed.
2. Defendant nos.1 to 4 are allowed to crossexamine plaintiff's
witness on next date.
3. Defendant nos. 1 to 4 are directed to complete crossexamination
of the plaintiff on next date.
4. Defendant nos.1 to 4 to bear costs of the Motion.
5. In view of above, the Notice of Motion is disposed off accordingly.
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge,
Dated : 11.10.2021 City Civil and Sessions Court,
Dictated on : 11.10.2021 Greater Bombay.
Typed on : 12.10.2021
Draft Submitted on : 12.10.2021
Signed on : 13.10.2021
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM 297/20 in 2684/14
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
14.10.21, at 2.45 pm (Nitin V. Ubale)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Selection Gr. Stenographer(Gr.1)
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.3)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/ ORDER 11/10/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 13/10/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 14/10/2021
-- 4 of 4 --