Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
ORDER BELOW EXH.15
EXECTION APPLICATION NO.527 OF 2017
IN
SUIT NO.2266 OF 2004
Mr. Tulshiram Sonawane (since deceased) ]
Mr. Ramesh Tulsiram Sonawane & Ors. ]...Decree holder
V/s.
Girijappa Raoji Whatkar (since deceased) ]
Smt. Sulochana Hotkar & Anr. ]..Judgment Debtor.
Appearances:
Ld. Adv. Akshay Pawar for plaintiff/Decree Holder.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Surendra Mittal for defendant/Judgment debtor.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI SHANKAR G.
BORLEPWAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATED : 28th November, 2019
ORAL ORDER
1. Judgment Debtor/ defendants filed this application through
Advocate for adjournment.
2. Perused application and say.
3. Following points arise for my determination. I record my
findings thereon for the reasons mentioned below:
-- 1 of 5 --
.. 2 .. O.B.EXH-15 IN
EXECTION APPLN 527-17
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether matter can be adjournment? In the negative.
2. What Order ? As per final order.
REASONS
As to point Nos.1 & 2.
4. Heard both Learned advocates.
5. In brief, it is the contention of the Judgment Debtor
/defendants that they are intending to file Civil Revision Application
along with condonation of delay application before the Hon'ble High
Court against one of the order passed by the Small Causes Court,
Mumbai. Therefore, the matter be adjourned at least for eight weeks.
6. It is further contention of the Judgment Debtor that Appeal
No.146 of 2019 is pending before Court Room No.05 in Small Causes
Court, Mumbai. There is also R.A.D. Suit No.380/2018 filed for
declaration is pending before the Small Causes Court Room No.15.
Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 of the said R.A.D. suit who are plaintiffs in the
present matter have taken out two notices. One notice is for rejection
of suit on the grounds of principal of Resjudicata. The said notice after
hearing finally rejected by the Small Causes Court. The Revision of the
said order is allowed by the Small Causes Court. Defendants in the
present matter want to file Civil Revision Application alongwith
condonation of delay application against the order of Small Causes
Court, Mumbai. Therefore, it is lastly prayed to adjourn the matter and
sufficient time be granted to the defendants to move before the Hon'ble
High Court for challenging the order passed by the Small Causes Court
-- 2 of 5 --
.. 3 .. O.B.EXH-15 IN
EXECTION APPLN 527-17
rejecting the Revision Application.
7. Applicant / plaintiffs filed say through advocate and oppose
the application on the ground that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court as
well as Hon'ble Supreme Court of India have confirmed the decree
passed by this Court. Defendants only want to prolong the matter.
Therefore, this application be dismissed and Execution application
No.527 of 2017 be allowed.
8. I have heard both advocates. Perused record. It appears
that this Execution Application is filed on the basis of Judgment and
Decree passed in S.C. Suit No.2266 of 2004.
9. The said S.C. Suit No.2266 of 2004 is disposed of by
Judgment dated 20.8.2016. The Operative Order passed in the said
S.C. Suit No.2266 of 2004 runs as under:
O R D E R
1. Suit is decreed with cost.
2. Defendants are hereby directed to hand over vacant
possession of the suit premises to the plaintiff within one
month from the date of this order.
3. Decree be drawn accordingly.
10. Perused the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in
Revision Application No.604 of 2016 with Civil Application No.224 of
2018. The Hon'ble High Court is pleased to dispose of the Civil
Application No.224 of 2018 observing that Civil Revision Application is
disposed of and nothing survives.
-- 3 of 5 --
.. 4 .. O.B.EXH-15 IN
EXECTION APPLN 527-17
11. Perused the order of the Supreme Court of India passed in
Special Leave to Appeal (c ) No(s).23031 – 23032/2018 dated
31.8.2018. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India is pleased to dismiss
the Special Leave Petition. Therefore, as on today no order of this
Court is pending before the Hon'ble High Court and also before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court.
12. This is Execution Court. Therefore, the defendants /
Judgment debtor have to bring stay order in the Execution Application
or this Court has to execute the Decree. Therefore, I do not find
substance to grant adjournment and adjourn the matter. Therefore, I
record my findings to point No.1 in the negative and point No.2
application is rejected as per final order. Hence following order:
ORDER
Adjournment application Exh.15 is rejected.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 28/11/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 28/11/2019.
Transcribed on : 04/12/2019.
The H.H.J. is on
training at MJA from
01.12.2019 to 14.12.2019.
Checked on : 18/12/2019
Signed on : 18/12/2019.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 4 of 5 --
.. 5 .. O.B.EXH-15 IN
EXECTION APPLN 527-17
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
20.12.19 at 12.10 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI S. G.
BORLEPWAR
(COURT ROOM NO.20)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 28.11.19
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 18.12.19
Judgment/order uploaded on 20.12.19
-- 5 of 5 --