Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: N/M 201/18 in CS 897/10 in Su 6641/00 1/3 Date : 18.6.2018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT, AT MUMBAI
CNR No.MHCC010007812018
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.201/2018
IN
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.897/2010
IN
SUIT NO.6641/2000
Puneet Pushkaraj Baldota ]... Plaintiff
V/s.
Vinod C. Lalwani & Ors. ]… Defendants
And
Bharat Manekchand Porwal & 2 Ors. ]... Applicants
Adv. S. J. Mahamuni for plaintiff.
None for defendants.
Adv. Ms. Bhatiya for applicants.
CORAM : HHJ Shri G. R. Agrawal
C. R. No.03
DATE : 18.6.2018
ORDER
(Dictated in open court)
1. By this motion, the applicants are praying for condonation of delay
in filing the motion and for setting aside order dated 21.9.2017, whereby
chamber summons no.897/2010 was dismissed for want of prosecution.
Since the plaintiff failed to file reply, by order dated 21.3.2018, hearing
in this motion was ordered to proceed without reply.
2. Heard Ld. Counsel for the parties.
3. The Ld. Counsel for the applicants has urged that the Court was
vacant from 21.11.2016 till 7.6.2017 and dates were being given in the
matter. On 6.7.2017 the board was discharged and the next date was
-- 1 of 4 --
N/M 201/18 in CS 897/10 in Su 6641/00 2/3 Date : 18.6.2018
noted as 3.10.2017. However, on 3.10.2017 they came to know that the
matter was listed on 19.9.2017 and 21.9.2017 and Chamber Summons
897/2010 was dismissed. Thereafter, matter was listed on 24.10.2017
for evidence. Hence, this motion for restoration of chamber summons.
4. The Ld. Counsel for plaintiff has opposed the prayer on the ground
that the applicants were negligent in prosecuting the matter. Hence, he
prayed for rejecting the motion.
5. Chamber Summons no.897/2010 was filed by applicants praying
to join them as defendants in present suit. The record shows that the
chamber summons no.897/2010 was pending for hearing since almost 8
years. On 9.5.2012, this Court granted last chance to the applicants for
hearing in chamber summons. On 27.6.2012, this Court observed that
since the matter is pending before Hon'ble High Court in respect of
same chamber summons, matter was adjourned for hearing in chamber
summons subject to decision of Hon'ble High Court. Since then, the
matter was simply adjourned for several years on the ground that similar
matter is pending before Hon'ble High Court. On 1.9.2014, this Court
observed that First Appeal before Hon'ble High Court will be decided
after several years and matter can not be kept pending like this.
Hence, the chamber summons was directed to be heard. The Advocate
for applicants was absent on that day. Thereafter, the matter was again
adjourned due to pendency of appeal before the Hon'ble High Court.
On 19.9.2017 this Court observed that the applicants have not placed on
record the developments in the matter pending before the Hon'ble High
Court and the matter was adjourned for said compliance. On 21.9.2017,
since there was no appearance on behalf of applicants and the earlier
developments in the Hon'ble High Court matter were not placed on
record, the chamber summons no.897/2010 was dismissed for want of
-- 2 of 4 --
N/M 201/18 in CS 897/10 in Su 6641/00 3/3 Date : 18.6.2018
prosecution.
6. The submission of Ld. Counsel for applicants that the date was
noted by the Junior Advocate as 3.10.2017 instead of 19.9.2017 cannot
be accepted. The dates are not similar to create any confusion. It is
apparent that a false reason has been given by the applicants in support
of the prayer for restoration. The applicants have not mentioned about
any developments in the appeal pending before Hon'ble High Court.
There is no explanation for noncompliance of the order passed by this
Court to place on record the said developments. It is the case of
applicants that the chamber summons no.897/2010 was depending
upon the outcome of the said appeal pending before the Hon'ble High
Court. Hence, it was necessary for the applicants to point out the
developments or the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court in the
pending appeal. In any case, this Court had passed order in the year
2012 that the chamber summons will be heard subject to decision of the
Hon'ble High Court. Despite this specific order, the applicants never
made any attempt to argue the said chamber summons. They failed to
produce the orders passed by Hon'ble High Court in the pending appeal
despite granting several opportunities. In view of the earlier orders and
the conduct of applicants, they are not entitled for the relief of
restoration of said chamber summons. Hence, notice of motion is liable
to be rejected. Hence, following order.
ORDER
Notice of motion no.201/2018 is rejected.
(G. R. Agrawal)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Date : 18.6.2018 Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 18.6.2018
Typed on : 19.6.2018
Signed on : 20.6.2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
-- 3 of 4 --
N/M 201/18 in CS 897/10 in Su 6641/00 4/3 Date : 18.6.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER”
20.6.2018 at 5.30 pm (Mrs. S. W. Tuscano)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court
room no.)
HHJ Shri G. R. Agrawal,
C.R. No.3
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
18.6.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
20.6.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
20.6.2018
-- 4 of 4 --