Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: CS 11718 in SU 173616 : 1 : Dt. 03.05.2018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 117 OF 2018
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 1736 OF 2016
Mr. Laxman Sitaram Sawant ...Plaintiff
Versus
1. Mr. Bapu Sitaram Sawant
2. Mrs. Pushpa Bapu Sawant
3. Mr. Ramesh Bapu Sawant
4. Mrs. Madhuri Ramesh Sawant
5. Mr. Sagar Bapu Sawant
6. Mr. Ravi Bapu Sawant …Defendants
AND
Mr. Madhukar Sitaram Sawant ...Applicant
Adv. Mr. Jagdish Mali for Plaintiff present.
Adv. Mr. Avdesh Kanoujia for Applicant present.
CORAM : HHJ DR (SMT.) SRISHTY NEELKANTH
(C.R. NO.02)
DATED : 3rd MAY, 2018
ORDER
This Chamber Summons has been filed by the Applicant to
be impleaded as a party defendant in the present suit.
2. The Applicant contends that he and the plaintiff and
defendant no. 1 were real brothers. The suit premises was allotted by
MHADA in lieu of slum structure occupied by their mother. Thus, the
applicant alongwith plaintiff and defendant no. 1 were the joint owners
of the suit premises. The plaintiff had willfully avoided to join the
applicant as a defendant in the present suit to prejudice his rights in the
suit premises. He thus prayed that since he was a proper and necessary
party, he should be joined as a party defendant in the present suit.
-- 1 of 3 --
CS 11718 in SU 173616 : 2 : Dt. 03.05.2018
3. The Plaintiff in his reply to the Chamber Summons has
denied the contentions of the applicant. He has stated that he was the
owner of the suit premises and the suit premises was allotted to him
alone and was not a joint family property. He thus opposed the
Chamber Summons.
4. Perused the Written Arguments filed by the learned
advocates of the Applicant and the Plaintiff.
5. It is observed that the Plaintiff had filed the present suit to
obtain an order of injunction restraining the defendants from disturbing
the peaceful use, occupation and possession of the suit premises by the
plaintiff and also for obtaining the vacant possession of the suit
premises.
6. On perusing the reply filed by the defendants in the Notice
of Motion No. 4647 of 2016 filed by the Plaintiff for temporary
injunction, the defendants have raised the plea that the suit premises
was a joint family property and was allotted by MHADA in lieu of the
old Slum structure standing in the name of their mother. It is also their
case that the installments of the suit premises were paid by their mother
and so the plaintiff could not claim to be the sole owner of the suit
premises. The same contention is raised by the applicant herein, who
admittedly is the real brother of the plaintiff.
7. Considering, the circumstances of the case before me, I am
of the opinion that for a just decision of the case and to avoid
multiplicity of proceedings, the applicant who claims to be the coowner
-- 2 of 3 --
CS 11718 in SU 173616 : 3 : Dt. 03.05.2018
of the suit premises would be a proper and necessary party in the
present suit. Thus, for the above stated reasons, the Chamber Summons
deserves to be allowed.
8. Hence, following Order is passed :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 117 of 2018 is allowed.
2. The Plaintiff is directed to carry out the amendment by
next date.
(Dr. Srishty Neelkanth)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay.
Date : 03.05.2018.
Dictated on : 03.05.2018.
Transcribed on : 03.05.2018.
Signed on : 03.05.2018.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
03.05.2018 at 5.38 p.m. (Y.M. SAKHARKAR)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
room no.)
DR(SMT) SRISHTY NEELKANTH (C.R.
No.02)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ ORDER
03.05.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
03.05.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 03.05.2018
-- 3 of 3 --