Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM No.38920 IN L C SUIT No.287519
MHCC010009242020
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 389 OF 2020
IN
L C SUIT NO. 2875 OF 2019
Nikhil Austin D'Souza ] ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Newlook Constructions Pvt. Ltd. & Others ]…Defendants.
Appearance:
Ld. Advocate Rajnish Dubey for plaintiff.
Ld. Advocate Redekar for Defendant No.1 to 4.
Ld Advocate Trivedi for Defendant No.8.
CORAM : K.P. KSHIRSAGAR
JUDGE, (C.R.NO.08)
DATE : 17/8/2022
ORAL ORDER
1) Defendant No.1 to 4 have taken out present Notice of
Motion for condonation of delay in filing their written statement and
for taking their written statement on record.
2) Perused the notice of motion, affidavit in support of
notice of motion, reply of plaintiff and record. Heard arguments
advanced by Ld Advocate for plaintiff and Ld Advocate for defendant
No.1 to 4.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM No.38920 IN L C SUIT No.287519
3) Ld Advocate for defendant No.1 to 4 argued that writ of
summons was not served to the defendant No.1 to 4 and on
18/11/19 defendant had appeared for first time in the suit. There is
delay of 30 days in filing their written statement and delay is not
intentional. From the reason stated in the affidavit in support of
notice of motion, it is clear that defendant No.1 to 4 have
demonstrated just and exceptional cause for non filing of written
statement within prescribed period. Defendant No.1 to 4 are ready to
file their written statement today itself. Therefore, Ld Advocate for
defendant No.1 to 4 submitted that notice of motion be made
absolute.
4) On the other hand Ld Advocate for plaintiff argued that
defendant No.1 to 4 failed to explain the delay properly and the
reason stated is not just and exceptional. Therefore, Ld Advocate for
plaintiff submitted that notice of motion be dismissed.
5) From the matter on record it appears that plaintiff has
not disputed the fact that writ of summons is not served to defendant
No.1 to 4. Moreover, plaintiff has not challenged the contention of
defendant No.1 to 4 in the affidavit in support of notice of motion. As
such there is no material on record so as to disbelieve the contention
of the defendant No.1 to 4. Therefore, from the affidavit in support of
notice of motion there appear just and exceptional cause for non
filing of written statement by defendant No.1 to 4 earlier. Moreover,
delay is also not inordinate.
6) Considering the matter on record and above discussion
present notice of motion deserves to be made absolute. Hence, court
proceeds to pass the following order:
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM No.38920 IN L C SUIT No.287519
ORDER
1) Notice of Motion No.389 of 2020 is made absolute.
2) Written Statement of defendant No.1 to 4 be taken on record if
tendered on or before next date.
3) Notice of Motion No. 389 of 2020 is disposed off accordingly.
Date : 17/8/2022. (Shri. K.P. Kshirsagar)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on :17/8/2022.
Typed on :18/8/2022.
Checked on : 18/8/2022.
Corrected & signed on : 19/8/2022.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM No.38920 IN L C SUIT No.287519
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
19/8/2022. Mrs. S.A. Shekade.
Name of the Judge (With Court room
no.)
SHRI K.P. Kshirsagar (Court Room
No.08)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
17/8/2022.
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
19/8/2022.
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 19/8/2022.
-- 4 of 4 --