Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.214 OF 2018
IN
SUIT NO.720 of 2017
Mr.Debvendra Liladhar Shah & ors. ...Applicants.
V.K. Industries Corporation Ltd. ...Plaintiff
V/s.
Emperius Infralogistic Pvt.Ltd. & ors. ...Defendants
Appearances:
Ld.Adv.Mrs.Tejasvi for plaintiff
Ld.Adv. Amey Deshpande for defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI ABHIJEET A.
NANDGAONKAR
(C.R.No.14)
DATED : 2nd April,2018
ORDER
By way of this notice of motion defendant Nos.2,3,4,5 and 6
prayed for condonation of delay of 163 days in causing appearance and
filing vakaltnama of applicants in this matter.
2. In supporting affidavit applicant Nos.2 to 6 submitted that, they
came to know about this suit, which is filed by plaintiff company against
them for recovery of alleged sum Rs.32,60,477/. When they received
plaint on 13.07.2017, as per provisions within 10 days they have to
appear before the Court. But being directors their authorized signatory
who tendered vakalatnama for defendant No.1, delivered to the office
of their Advocate and asked them to appear before the Court. So
vakalatnama signed on 03.08.2017 for compliance with the provisions
MHCC01-000847-2018
-- 1 of 4 --
NM 214/2018 .. 2 .. Suit No.720/2017
as per law, is taken out matter on board. But inadvertently while
tendering vakaltnama only one vakaltnama was tender, which had been
signed by authorized signatory of defendant and defendant Nos.2 to 6
who signed separate vakaltnama remained to be taken on record.
Therefore, plaintiff who has initially joined these defendant Nos.2 to 6
to this suit are also be given opportunity to appear and contest the suit.
For which their appearance through their Advocate is necessary. Hence,
delay of 163 days occurred in filing their vakalatnama was not
deliberate, but purely unintentional and it be condoned in the interest
of justice. No prejudice will be caused to plaintiff if their appearance is
permitted. Hence, applicants prayed that, notice of motion be made
absolute and they be permitted to file their vakalatname on record.
3. After service of the notice of motion learned Advocate for plaintiff
on 16.01.2018 filed their reply to the notice of motion and submitted
that they have no objection to allow this notice of motion.
4. Heard learned Advocate Mr.Amey Deshpande for applicants and
learned Advocate Sabhil Manjrekar for plaintiff. Perused submissions.
5. The reason mentioned that two vakaltanama are separately
signed by these applicants one was by their authorized signatory of
defendant No.1 company and their directors, but it was not placed on
record due to inadvertence. It may be due to over site, but learned
Advocate for applicants/defendants must be diligent enough to show
their appearance before the Court. However, reason mentioned is just
and proper. But at this stage if permission to appear before the Court is
granted by condoning delay will suffice ends of justice, which give the
applicants an opportunity to appear and place their defence available to
-- 2 of 4 --
NM 214/2018 .. 3 .. Suit No.720/2017
them on record. In such circumstances, delay needs to be condoned
and permission to appear defendant Nos.2 to 6 needs to be granted.
However, delay of 163 days is caused, though it is unintentional but it
may be due to negligence and therefore, it is necessary to direct
applicants to pay costs of Rs.1,000/ each to be payable to DLSA,
Mumbai on or before next day as condition precedent for permitting
them to appear before the Court for filing their vakaltanama on record.
With these observations, notice of motion needs to be made absolute
and therefore, I proceed to pass the following order :
O R D E R
Notice of Motion No.214 of 2018 is made absolute subject
to payment of costs of Rs.1,000/ by each of applicant
Nos.2 to 6 to D.L.S.A., Mumbai on or before next date for
permitting them to file their appearance and vakalatnama
on record by condoning delay of 163 days.
(ABHIJEET A. NANDGONKAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.14)
Dt.:02/04/2018 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 02.04.2018
Transcribed on : 02.04.2018
Signed on :
kps/
-- 3 of 4 --
NM 214/2018 .. 4 .. Suit No.720/2017
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
04.04.2018 at 4.45 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(KISHOR PRAKASH SHERWADE)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI A.A.
NANDGAONKAR
(COURT ROOM NO.14)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 02.04.2018
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 03.04.2018
Judgment/order uploaded on 04.04.2018
-- 4 of 4 --