Final Order 2

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 C/H No.259/2019 in E.A. No.183/2016
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.259 OF 2019
(C.N.R.No. MHCC010013422019)
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.183 OF 2016
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO. 3424 OF 2007
Santosh B. Chavan ]..Plaintiffs.
V/s.
1 Santosh Sitaram Chavan and ]
four others. ]..Defendants.
Advocate Mr. Nadar for plaintiff.
Advocate Mr. Parkar for defendant no.1.
Advocate Ms. Prabhu for defendant no.2.
Advocate Mr. Trivedi for defendant no.5.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
MS. S.P. PONKSHE.
(C.R.NO.12)
DATE : 13th JUNE 2019
ORAL ORDER
This Chamber summons has been taken out by the
plaintiff/Decree Holder for seeking permission to rectify the
typographical mistake occurred in the Execution Application No.183 of
2016 in respect of suit premises viz. Flat No.102, “A” Wing, Shivkrupa
Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., 773776 Bante Wadi, College Lane,
-- 1 of 5 --
2 C/H No.259/2019 in E.A. No.183/2016
Babrekar Marg, Daar, Mumbai400 028, which is wrongly typed as flat
no.105.
2 The Decree Holder/plaintiff has filed his affidavit in
support of chamber summons and produced documents along with
Chamber summons.
3 Defendant no.1 has filed affidavit in reply and resisted
Chamber Summons. It is contended by defendant no.1 that in the
decree directions have been given to defendant nos.2 and 3 that to give
premises to the plaintiff and the plaintiff has not asked specific number
of premises in his entire suit. Further, it is contended that the present
Chamber Summons is not maintainable. Hence, prayed for dismissal of
chamber summons along with compensatory costs.
4 the Decree Holder/plaintiff has filed rejoinder to the reply
of defendant no.1 and along with rejoinder, the plaintiff has filed
possession letter issued in the name of the plaintiff.
5 Heard learned advocate for the Decree Holder/plaintiffs
and the learned advocate for defendant no.1.
6 It seems that the present Execution Application has filed by
the Decree Holder for executing decree passed in Suit No.3424/2007.
On 20.10.2018, order in respect of issuance of fresh writ of possession
as per the provisions of Order XXI Rule 35 of the C.P.C. has been passed
along with the directions to the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai to
provide police aid for execution of the warrant on payment of requisite
charges. It appears that the said order has been challenged by
-- 2 of 5 --
3 C/H No.259/2019 in E.A. No.183/2016
Judgment Debtor before the Hon'ble High Court by filing Writ Petition
No.12804/2018. The said Writ Petition has been rejected by the Hon'ble
High Court on 30.11.2018. Thus, there is no stay order to the order
passed on 20.10.2018 in respect of issuance of writ of possession
warrant.
7 In this background, the decree holder has filed this
Chamber Summons for making correction of typographical mistake in
respect of flat number, which is in Execution Application subject matter
of the decree. The learned advocate for defendant no.1 has urged that
in the decree, no number of the flat has been mentioned. After perusal
of decree, it seem that the directions have been given in the decree to
put the plaintiff in the possession of permanent alternate
accommodation as per the agreement dated 23.07.2003. In the
rejoinder, the plaintiff has filed on record possession letter received and
it discloses that flat no.102 on first floor seems to be allotted to the
present plaintiff as permanent alternate accommodation. It seems from
the order passed in Writ Petition by the Hon'ble High Court that decree
has been confirmed upto second appeal. Thus, in the facts and
circumstances, the plaintiff has asked to make correction of flat number
in the Execution Application, in view of allotment letter received by the
plaintiff. Therefore, for execution of decree, correct flat number is
necessary to be mentioned in the Execution of Application. It appears
that instead of flat no.102, in the Execution Application due
typographical mistake number of the flat is mentioned as flat no.105.
Therefore, in the interest of justice and considering the nature of
proposed correction, this Chamber Summons is allowed. With this, I
proceed to pass the following order:.
-- 3 of 5 --
4 C/H No.259/2019 in E.A. No.183/2016
ORDER
The Chamber Summons No. 259 of 2019 is made absolute
in terms of prayer clause (a).
2 The plaintiff/Decree Holder is permitted to carry out
amendment, as prayed within two weeks, from the date of this order.
4 Chamber Summons No.259 of 2019 stands disposed of
accordingly.
(S. P. PONKSHE)
Judge,
City Civil Court,
Date: 13/06/2019. Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 13/06/2019
Transcribed on : 14/06/2019
Signed on : 15/06/2019
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
15/06/2019 At 2.50 p.m. MRS. SUPRIYA S. PAWAR
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ MS. S. P. PONKSHE
(C.R.NO.12)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
13/06/2019
-- 4 of 5 --
5 C/H No.259/2019 in E.A. No.183/2016
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 15/06/2019
Judgment/Order uploaded on 15/06/2019
-- 5 of 5 --