Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.564 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2105 OF 2012
Smt. Jamila @ Vimla Moihammed Kabir … Plaintiff
V/s.
Mr. Satyawan Raoji Surwade & Anr. … Defendants
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Manish Kanade for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Raja Mahadik for defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI MILIND V. KURTADIKAR
(C.R. No.20)
DATED : 25th SEPTEMBER, 2019
ORDER
The defendants have taken out this notice of motion for
setting aside no cross order dated 16.09.2016 and to allow them to
cross examine PW1 Smt. Jamila @ Vimla Kabir.
2. It is argued on behalf of defendant that on 16.09.2016 the
matter was listed for crossexamination of PW1 Smt. Jamila @ Vimla on
behalf of defendants. On that day son of defendant no.2 was present in
the Court. However, his presence is not marked as he was not party to
the proceedings. The Ld. Counsel for defendants went to Nashik for
ailment of his mother. Therefore, she could not remain present before
the Court. Said reason is genuine one and there was no intention to
MHCC01001476 2019
-- 1 of 3 --
NM 564/2019 .. 2 .. Suit No.2105/12
delay the hearing. Defendant has every hope of success. Therefore,
defendants be allowed to crossexamine plaintiffs witness by setting
aside no cross order.
3. Plaintiff has resisted the application on the ground that
plaintiff is senior citizen and suffering from heart ailment. Evidence
affidavit is filed two years before 2016. As such defendants have got
ample opportunity to crossexamine to plaintiffs witness. However,
defendant remained absent for no reason. Defendant want to prolong
the matter. Therefore, said order may not be recalled.
4. It is a matter of record that on 02.09.2016 the documents
of plaintiff's were exhibited and matter was listed on 16.09.2016 for
crossexamination. On 16.09.2016 as none appeared for defendant,
Court has passed no cross order. It goes to show that 16.09.2016 is the
first date for crossexamination of plaintiffs witness by defendant. On
the same day Court has passed no cross order. It goes to show that no
sufficient opportunity is given to the defendant to crossexamine the
plaintiff. Considering the circumstances it cannot be said that
defendant has intention to delay the matter. In such circumstances, I
am of the opinion that opportunity needs to be given to the defendant
to crossexamine plaintiff's witness. Accordingly the order.
ORDER
1. NM No.564/19 in SU No.2105/12 is hereby allowed.
2. The no cross order dated 16.09.2016 passed against
defendant is hereby set aside on defendant paying
cost of Rs.2,000/ to the plaintiff or to deposit it in
-- 2 of 3 --
NM 564/2019 .. 3 .. Suit No.2105/12
the Court on or before next date.
3. On payment of cost order Plaintiff is directed to keep
present its witness for cross examination.
( MILIND V. KURTADIKAR )
Judge, (C.R. No.20)
Dt.: 25/09/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 25.09.2019
Transcribed on : 26.09.2019
Signed on : 27.09.2019
sbk/
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
27.09.2019 05.30 p.m. Sanjay Baliram Kaskar
(Stenographer H.G.)
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri M.V. Kurtadikar
(CR No.20)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgement/Order.
25.09.2019.
Judgement/order signed by P.O on 27.09.2019.
Judgement/order uploaded on 27.09.2019.
-- 3 of 3 --