Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: MHCC010014812020
EXH.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.19 OF 2020
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.856 OF 2021
Mamta Kapurchand Maheshwari ...Plaintiff.
V/s.
Mr. Rajkumar Mantri ....Defendant.
Appearances:
Ld. Adv. Ms. Trusha Maheshwari for Plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Ms. Minal Yadav for defendant.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. R.K. KSHIRSAGAR
(C.R.No.13)
DATED : 20th June, 2022
ORDER
1. The present Summons for Judgment is taken out by the
plaintiff against the defendant for recovery of sum of Rs.5,00,000/.
-- 1 of 5 --
SJ 19 of 2020 .. J/2 .. in Suit 856 of 2021
2. It was submitted by the plaintiff that the plaintiff had given
the amount of Rs.5,00,000/ to the defendant under friendly loan on
interest. The defendant failed and neglected to pay the principal
amount as well as the interest and therefore the plaintiff filed the
present suit. It was further submitted that the defendant has raised no
valid defence in the suit and therefore, Summons for Judgment be
issued and defendant be directed to pay the amount.
3. The defendant filed reply to the Summons for Judgment
alongwith application for leave to defend. It was submmitted by the
defendant that the present suit as well as the Summons for Judgment is
not maintainable. The plaintiff has not mentioned the true facts. The
plaintiff has suppressed various facts and circumstances. The plaintiff is
not entitled for any relief. There are various issues arising for
consideration by the Court and therefore, unconditional leave to defend
the suit be granted to the defendant and Summons for Judgment be
dismissed.
4. The plaintiff filed rejoinder to the Summons for Judgment
and denied the contention of defendant.
5. Heard the Learned Advocate for plaintiff and defendant.
Also perused the written submissions by both the parties vide Exh.3 and
4.
6. The Learned Advocate for plaintiff relied upon following
citations as follows:
1. M/s. Daya Chand Uttam Chand Prakash Jain & Ors. Vs.
Smt. Santosh Devi Sharma (1997 SCC OnLine Del 275).
-- 2 of 5 --
SJ 19 of 2020 .. J/3 .. in Suit 856 of 2021
2. Sun N Sand Hotel Limited Vs. M/s. V.V. Kamat Huf
(2003(3) Mh.L.J.
3. R. Kumar & Company Vs. Chemicals Unlimited (2000(1)
Mh.L.J. 687)
4. Jyotsna K. Valia Vs. T.S. Parekh and Co. (2007 SCC
OnLine Bom 413)
5 Rajesh Kumari Vs. Prem Chand Jain (AIR 1998 Delhi 80)
6 Dushyant Singh Dabas Vs. Dinesh Kumar (2014 SCC
OnLine Del 7269)
7 Atul Anand Vs. Nanak Food Industries (2006 SCC OnLine
Del 851)
8 V.K. Enterprises Vs. Shiva Steels ((2010)9 SCC 256)
9 Shri Chandeep Singh Bhatia Vs. Shri Dinesh Sehgal &
Ors. (2016 SCC OnLine Del 5963)
10. Ashwani Kumar Vs. Kalimuddin (2018 SCC OnLine Del
11003)
7. The Learned Advocate for defendant relied upon following
citations as follows:
1. B.L. Kashyap Vs. M/s. Jms Steels LAWS (SC) 2022146.
2. Judgment in the case of Jwaladutta Jankidas HUF Vs.
Jayant Bhavanji Soni & Ors. SJ No.91 of 2019 in
Commercial Suit No.1131 of 2019 alongwith Interim
Application No.1 of 2019.
8. I carefully gone through the submissions raised by both the
parties. It seems that the plaintiff is seeking recovery of amount
advanced to the defendant towards the friendly loan. However, the
defendant denied the friendly loan and submitted that the plaintiff is
carrying out business without money lending license and therefore, the
present suit under the category of Summary Suit is not maintainable.
-- 3 of 5 --
SJ 19 of 2020 .. J/4 .. in Suit 856 of 2021
The defendant also raised objection on the ground of jurisdiction of this
Court to try the suit. It seems that the defendant has raised substantial
defence so as to provide an opportunity to defendant to prove his case
on merits. In order to adjudicate the matter on merits it would be
appropriate to grant an opportunity to the defendant to prove his
defence on merits and therefore, it will be appropriate to grant leave to
defend to the defendant.
9. Considering the nature of transaction and in order to
secure the interest of the plaintiff, it would be appropriate to grant
conditional leave to the defendant to defend the suit. I, therefore,
proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
1. Conditional leave is granted to defendant to defend the suit.
2. The defendant shall deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/ to be
paid to the plaintiff within 2 months from date of this order.
3. The defendant after payment of the amount of Rs.1,00,000/ will
be at liberty to file written statement on record.
4. The Summons for Judgment No.19 of 2020 is disposed off
accordingly.
Parties to bear their own costs.
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Dt.: 20062022 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 20062022
Transcribed on : 20062022
checked on : 20062022
Signed on : 20062022
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 4 of 5 --
SJ 19 of 2020 .. J/5 .. in Suit 856 of 2021
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
20.06.2022 at 04.35 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME (VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge H.H.J.Smt.R.K.Kshirsagar
(COURT ROOM NO.13)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
20.06.2022
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 20.06.2022
Judgment/order uploaded on 20.06.2022
-- 5 of 5 --