Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GR.BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.517 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2256 OF 2018
CNR NO.MHCCO10013532019
Surendra Vasant Murudkar ..Plaintiff
V/s
Pradeep Vasant Murudkar and ors ..Defendants
Adv. Hasan Khan for plaintiff present.
Adv. Rishi Bhat for defendant no. 4 present.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI M.SALMAN AZMI
DATE: 10/07/2019
ORAL ORDER
1. Defendant no.4 has tendered the notice of motion for
condonation of delay in filing the written statement.
2. Heard. Ld. Counsel for defendant no.4 submitted
that writ of summons was issued on 25/10/2018.
The said writ of summons was received by the office
staff Pradeep Kothari who was on leave from
27/10/2018 to 05/11/2018 and after rejoining the
office he has informed about the service of writ of
summons. On 26/11/2018, defendant no.4
appointed the present advocate and informed him to
file vakalatnama on his behalf. The advocate sent
draft written statement to defendant no.4 in the
-- 1 of 3 --
2
second week of December2018 for approval, but, as
defendant no.4 was out of station due to Christmas
vacation, he was unable to go through the written
statement and therefore there is delay of 60 days in
filing the written statement. Defendant no.4 prayed
for condition of delay.
3. The Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff submitted that
notice of motion be allowed subject to heavy costs.
4. After going through the contention in the notice of
motion, it appears that writ of summons was served
on 25/10/2018 to one employee of defendant no.4.
He resumed the service after 8 days. The reason
given does not sound proper. Be that as it may, this
Court is first facts finding Court and when the
substantial rights of parties are involved, an
opportunity is required to be given to the defendant
to present his case. Besides this, the Court should not
adopt hyper technical and pedantic approach in
dealing with such type of petition. No prejudice
would be caused to the plaintiff is the notice of
motion is allowed. Further plaintiff has not raised
any objection for taking the written statement on
record. Hence, it is expedient to pass following
order:
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 517/2019 is allowed in
terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) subject to cost of
Rs. 5,000/ to be paid to the plaintiff within a period
of two weeks from today.
-- 2 of 3 --
3
2. Payment of cost is subject precedent.
3. Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly.
10/07/2019 M.SALMAN AZMI
CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR.MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 10/07/2019
Transcribed on : 14/07/2019
Signed on : 19/07/2019
'CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
19/07/19 at 1.00 pm.
MRS.T.C.KAMBLE
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI M.S.AZMI, CR NO.1
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
10/07/2019
Judgment and order signed by P.O. 19/07/2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 19/07/2019
-- 3 of 3 --