Date: 16-03-2020
Business: Plaintiff absent.
Defendant absent.
Adv. Vaishali for plff. Present.
Adv. For the plff. Tendered register S/J No. 22/2020 @ affidavit in support.
He also filed affidavit of service for S/J. t.o.r.
Matter is adjd to 23.06.2020 for S/J Argument.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2020
Date: 23-06-2020
Business: Due to Covid-19 Lockdown
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2020
Date: 09-09-2020
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 12-11-2020
Date: 12-11-2020
Business: Due to Covid-19 Pandemic none appeared.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 04-02-2021
Date: 04-02-2021
Business: Both the parties and their advocates are absent.
L.O. At 03.05 p.m.
Adv. Manmohan Rao for plff. Present.
Matter is adjd to 19.03.2021 for Arguments.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2021
Date: 19-03-2021
Business: P.O. IS ON LEAVE. (Second Session)
Matter is adjd to 11.06.2021 for arguments.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 11-06-2021
Date: 11-06-2021
Business: Due to Covid-19 Pendamic Lockdown
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 08-07-2021
Date: 08-07-2021
Business: Both the parties and their advocates are absent.
Due to Covid-19 pandemic.
Matter is adjd to 26.08.2021 for arguments.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2021
Date: 26-08-2021
Business: COURT IS VACANT
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 13-10-2021
Date: 13-10-2021
Business: Court is vacant
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 13-12-2021
Date: 13-12-2021
Business: Adv Vaishali I/b. Manmohan Rao for plaintiff present.
Adv for defendant present.
Adv Darshan Jain for plaintiff prayed for grant of time to produce original document on record. Short time is granted with direction to produce the original documents on record next date without fail.
Matter is adjd to 20.12.2021 for filing documents.
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 20-12-2021
Date: 20-12-2021
Business: Court is on leave hence, matter is adjourned.
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 18-01-2022
Date: 18-01-2022
Business: Plaintiff and defendant absent.
Adv. Vaishali Bikule for plaintiff is present.
Matter is adjd for filing affidavit of document to 23.02.2022.
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 23-02-2022
Date: 23-02-2022
Business: Court is on Leave
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2022
Date: 02-05-2022
Business: PO is on training. Matter adj. to
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 05-07-2022
Date: 05-07-2022
Business: None for Plaintiff.
Adv. Mr. Dilip Satle for Defendant present.
The original documents as directed by this court are not yet filed.
Matter adjourned to 25/08/2022 for Hearing on SJ.
Next Purpose: FILING AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENT
Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2022
Date: 25-08-2022
Business: Adv Manmohan Rao for Plaintiff present.
Adv Dilip Satale for the deft present.
Adv for the plff filed compilation of documents. TOR marked as Exh-7.
O- filed.
Copy given to other side.
Matter adjourned to 17.11.2022 for hearing on SJ.
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2022
Date: 17-11-2022
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv.Divya Jain for defendant present. She tendered pursis (Exh-8) along with online company master data printout with respect to plaintiff company, taken out from the website Ministry Corporate Affairs. She submits that the status of plaintiff company is shown under CIRP.
She submits that as the plaintiff is under CIRP, the present suit may not proceed. She seeks time to place on record further details about insolvency proceeding, if any, initiated against plaintiff.
In view of submission, time is granted.
Matter is adj to 07/01/2023 for hearing on SJ.
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2023
Date: 07-01-2023
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv.Dileep Satale for defendant present. Mr.Dileep Satale submits that plaintiff itself seems to be facing liquidation as CIRP seems to be appointed on plaintiff company. He submits that plaintiff ought to have appeared and clarified whether plaintiff company is in existence or not.
From the copy of company/LLP Master Data (along with Exh-8). The contention of advocate for defendant with respect to appointment of CIRP on plaintiff company appears correct. Therefore, plaintiff is excepted to clarify the position and to proceed in the suit as per the law. If plaintiff remain absent it would be presumed that plaintiff is not interested to proceed with this matter.
Matter is adj to 02/03/2023 for compliance/steps by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2023
Date: 02-03-2023
Business: None for plaintiff.
None for defendant.
Plaintiff has not clarified regarding its authority to proceed with the suit as apparently CIRP is appointed for the plaintiff company.
Matter is adj to 16/06/2023 for compliance by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 16-06-2023
Date: 16-06-2023
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. K. P. SHRIKHANDE - (C.R.NO.61)
Plaintiff and his advocate absent.
Adv. Shreyas S. Pandalai i/b Divya D. Jain for defendant present.
Matter is adj to 08.09.2023 for compliance by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 08-09-2023
Date: 08-09-2023
Business: Presiding officer is on leave.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2023
Date: 07-12-2023
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. K. P. SHRIKHANDE - (C.R.NO.61)
The plaintiff and his advocate are absent.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 01.02.2024 for compliance by the plaintiff.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 01-02-2024
Date: 01-02-2024
Business: P.O. IS ON LEAVE
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2024
Date: 18-03-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
The plaintiff and his advocate are absent.
Adv. Divya Jain for defendant is present.
On perusing record, it appears that the plaintiff is absent since long and has not taken steps to comply the directions dated 07.01.2023. The plaintiff is given last chance to take the steps.
Matter is adj to 06.05.2024 for taking steps.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 06-05-2024
Date: 06-05-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Court is busy in dictating judgment in Suit No. 8646/99 and summons for judgment No.56/05, 57/05, 420/05, 421/05, 440/05 and 443/05 . Hence, today\''s board is discharged. Parties are liberty to file applications, notice of motion and affidavits, if any.
Matter is adj to 21.06.2024 for compliance.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 21-06-2024
Date: 21-06-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv Aditya Seetharaman i/b. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present.
Adv for defendant is present.
Advocate for plaintiff filed application to file vakalantma of fresh advocate. T.Or. It is marked as Exh-9.
Matter is adj to 09.08.2024 for compliance.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 09-08-2024
Date: 09-08-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Vishal Shriyan with Adv. Arsalan A. Thaver for plaintiff is present.
Adv. Divya Jain for defendant is present.
Keep back.
Later on at 12.34 pm
Adv. Vishal Shriyan with Adv. Arsalan A. Thaver for plaintiff is present and filed undertaking to file Vakalatnama on next date. Taken on record. It is marked as Exh-10.
Adv. Divya Jain for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 27.09.2024 for taking steps and filing Vakalatnama.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 27-09-2024
Date: 27-09-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
The plaintiff and his advocate are absent.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi i/b Adv. Divya Jain for defendant No.1 is present.
The plaintiff is given last chance to take steps.
Matter is adj to 17.12.2024 for taking steps.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2024
Date: 17-12-2024
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Arsalan Thaver i/b. Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present and filed an application along with affidavit in support to discharge previous advocate and allow to file Vakalatnama without no objection.
T.O.R. It is marked as Exh.11.
Order Below Exh.11
Perused application and record. Heard advocate for plaintiff. As per the new counsel of plaintiff during pendency of suit plaintiff company has undergone CIRP and even name of company has been changed to \"AMNS Khopali Limited\". Therefore, new management of Plaintiff company has appointed new counsel. Even, letter dated 21/11/2024 was issued to earlier counsel which is delivered to him on 22/11/2024 requesting to give no objection. However, earlier counsel has not given no objection. It appears that plaintiff has filed supporting documents along with his application and even application is supported by affidavit. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances mentioned in the application, I am of the view that it is necessary to discharge erstwhile adovcate and allow new counsel to file his vakalatnama on behalf of plaintiff company to contest the matter. Hence, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1. Application is allowed.
2. Vakalatnma of new counsel is taken on record and it is marked as Exh.12.
Later on at 12.45p.m.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi i/b. Divya Jain for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 29.01.2025 for steps by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 29-01-2025
Date: 29-01-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Aditya Seetaraman for plaintiff is present and requested for adjournment to take steps. Adjournment is granted.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 12.03.2025 for taking steps.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 12-03-2025
Date: 12-03-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Aditya Seethraman i/b Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present and for production of documents along with list and documents. Taken on record. It is marked as Exh-13 and 14 respectively. O-Production is allowed.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present through video conferencing.
Matter is adj to 08.05.2025 for taking steps.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 08-05-2025
Date: 08-05-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
As court is busy in dictating order in SJ No.322/22, 323/22, 650/22, 651/22, 47/23, 118/15, draft NM No.4913/12 and 4914/12, remaining board is discharged. Parties are liberty to file applicantions and documents, if any.
Matter is adj to 07.08.2025 for taking steps.
Next Purpose: FOR TAKING STEPS
Next Hearing Date: 07-08-2025
Date: 07-08-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Riddhi Wagle i/b Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present and filed draft Chamber Summons for amendment along with affidavit in support. O-Leave is granted to register the draft Chamber Summons. Copy served to other side.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 18.09.2025 for filing registered Chamber summons and reply.
Next Purpose: REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2025
Date: 18-09-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present and requested for adjournment. Adjournment is granted.
Matter is adj to 15.10.2025 for filing reply to Chamber summons.
Next Purpose: REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2025
Date: 15-10-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Manjiri Dhotre i/b Adv. Vishal S. Shriyan for plaintiff is present.
Adv. Arushi Gandhi i/b S. J. Nagashvi for defendant is present and filed reply to Chamber summons. Copy served to other side.
Matter is adj to 25.11.2025 for rejoinder/ hearing on Chamber summons
Next Purpose: REJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 25-11-2025
Date: 25-11-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Manjir Dhotre i/b Adv. Vishal S. Shriyan for plaintiff is present and requested for adjournment to file rejoinder. Adjournment is granted as a last chance.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi i/b M/s S. J Nagrani for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 17.12.2025 for filing rejoinder to reply to CS and hearing on it.
Next Purpose: REJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 17-12-2025
Date: 17-12-2025
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Manjiri Dhotre i/b Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present and filed rejoinder to reply to Chamber summons. Taken on record. Copy is served to other side.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Matter is adj to 19.01.2026 for hearing on Chamber summons.
Next Purpose: C/S HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2026
Date: 19-01-2026
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff is present.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Heard advocate for plaintiff on Chamber summons.
Matter is adj to 06.02.2026 for hearing on Chamber summons by defendant.
Next Purpose: C/S HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 06-02-2026
Date: 06-02-2026
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Vishal Shriyan with Adv. Aditya Seetharaman for plaintiff is present.
Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant is present.
Heard both parties on Chamber summons
Matter is adj to 26.02.2026 for Order on Chamber summons
Next Purpose: CH/S ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 26-02-2026
Date: 26-02-2026
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Manjiri Dhotre for plaintiff is present through video conference.
Court is busy in dictating ex-parte judgment in Sum. Suit No. 626/21, 619/21 and dictating order in SJ No.40/23 and recording evidence in Suit No. 8044/01.
Matter is adj to 02.03.2026 for Order on Chamber summons.
Next Purpose: CH/S ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2026
Date: 02-03-2026
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE -(C.R.NO.81)
Adv. Manjiri Dhotre for plaintiff is present through video conference.
Order on CS No.2090/25
Perused Chamber summons, reply, rejoinder and record. Heard both parties. I have gone through case laws cited on behalf of plaintiff. It is submitted on behalf of plaintiff that during pendancy of the suit plaintiff company know as Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. undergone Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process vide order dated 14.10.2022, resolution plan in CIR of the plaintiff was approved(Exh-A). Further, after completion of CIRP, name of company was changed to AMNS Khopoli Ltd. from 15.12.2022(Exh-B) is certificate issued by Registrar of Companies. It is further submitted that thereafter, in view of scheme of amalgamation and arrangement under section 230 and 232 of Companies Act, 2013 by and between AMNS Khopoli Ltd. and Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. was approved by Honble National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai-II vide its order dated 27.09.2024 in CA 108/2024 in CP (CAA) 50 (MB) 2024 in CA (CAA) 269 (MB) 2023 and by Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Ahamedabad-II vide its order dated 13.12.2024 in CP (CAA) 14 (AHM) 2024 in CA (CAA) 64 (AHM) 2023 (Exh-C and D). The said scheme is came to an effect from 02.02.2025. It is further submitted that thereafter on 17.01.2025 Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. has been converted into private Limited Company. Accordingly Ministry Corporate Affairs issued certificate(Exh-E). It is further submitted that defendant has raised objection that there is no verification of affidavit filed in support of Chamber summons and he is not authorized as well as there is delay to file Chamber summons. It is submitted on behalf of plaintiff that Mr. Rajesh Raktate is authorized representative of plaintiff company and the company had issued authority letter in his favour which is filed on record at Exh-A along with rejoinder. Further, copy of board of resolution dated 16.12.2019 is filed as Exh-B along with rejoinder. Further, in rejoinder in paragraph No.5 sub-clause (d), it is stated that contents in affidavits in support of Chamber summons are true in the knowledge of authorized person of plaintiff company. It is further submitted that the proceeding was continued after change in the name of plaintiff's company. Thereafter, scheme of amalgamation was approved. New management took charge of plaintiff company and wants to appoint new advocate. However, erstwhile advocate of plaintiff company did not give no objection. Therefore, plaintiff could not filed Chamber summons. Therefore, if there is delay, it may be condone. Further, So far as absence of verification clause is concerned, it is procedural defect, which can be cured and plaintiff has cured it. The plaintiff has relied on ratio laid down in United Bank of India Vs. Naresh Kumar and Ors. (1996) 6 SSC 660 and Delta Disterlaries Ltd. Vs. Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd and Ors, 2008(1) MHLJ 899. It is further submitted that therefore, Chamber summons may be allowed.
On the other hand, it is argued on behalf of defendant that Chamber summons filed by the plaintiff and affidavit in support is filed by one Mr. Rajesh Raktate claiming to be authorized signatory of plaintiff company. However, said affidavit is not having verification clause and therefore, it cannot be considered as affidavit and cannot be read in evidence. Further, plaintiff has relied on authority letter dated 21.03.2025 in favour of Mr. Rajesh Raktate is also not maintainable as said letter does not establishes clear chain of authorisation connecting the applicant with original plaintiff. Further, there is no reference of resolution of Board of Directors issuing authority letter and even, issuer of authority letter is not shown as company secretary. Therefore, said authority letter cannot be relied on. Further, there is delay of three years and it is not properly explained by the plaintiff and therefore, Chamber summons cannot be allowed. It is further submitted that plaintiff cannot be allowed to amend the name of the plaintiff company as it would prejudice the rights of the defendant. Further, plaintiff had tried to file copy of resolution and authority letter along with rejoinder, however, even rejoinder is not having proper verification clause. Further, Resolution at Exh-B annexed to rejoinder is dated 16.12.2019. Wherein name of Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. However, as per Exh-E annexed to Chamber summons certificate is issued on 17.01.2025. Therefore, said resolution is not valid and cannot be considered. Further, case laws cited on behalf of plaintiff are not applicable to the facts of the present case. Hence, Chamber summons may be dismissed with costs.
Perused Chamber summons, reply, rejoinder and record of the case. The plaintiff has filed present Chamber summons to amend the name fo the plaintiff company. As per the plaintiff name of the plaintiff company has changed from Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. to Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. It is also contention of plaintiff that erstwhile plaintiff company has undergone CIRP and thereafter, company name is changed AMNS Khopoli Ltd. The plaintiff has filed documents at Exh-A and B in support of said contentions. It is further submitted that thereafter, in view of scheme of amalgamation and arrangement under section 230 and 232 of Companies Act, 2013 by and between AMNS Khopoli Ltd. and Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. was approved by Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai-II vide its order dated 27.09.2024 in CA 108/2024 in CP (CAA) 50 (MB) 2024 in CA (CAA) 269 (MB) 2023 and by Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Ahamedabad-II vide its order dated 13.12.2024 in CP (CAA) 14 (AHM) 2024 in CA (CAA) 64 (AHM) 2023 (Exh-C and D). The said scheme is came to an effect from 02.02.2025. Thus, the plaintiff has corroborated his contention by filing documents on record. Thereafter, Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. has converted into Pvt. Ltd. Company on 17.01.2025. The plaintiff has filed certificate at Exh-E in support of said contentions. It is pertinent to note that defendant has not denied the said fact. However, it is the contention of the defendant that there is no verification clause to the affidavit in support of Chamber summons. Admittedly, there is no verification clause. However, the plaintiff has cured the said defect by filing the rejoinder. It is also contention of the defendant that authority letter dated 21.03.2025 does not mentioned reference of Board resolution. The plaintiff has filed Letter of Authority dated 30.09.2025, copy of Board resolution dated 16.12.2019 as Exh-A and B to the rejoinder. Thus, it appears that the plaintiff has cured the said defect.
It is the contention of the defendant that the extract of Board resolution dated 16.12.2019 is issued by Directors of Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. However, the said company was amalgamated in the year 2025. Therefore, they cannot be issued extract of meeting dated 16.12.2019. It is pertinent to note that the Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. is new name of erstwhile plaintiff company and extract of meeting dated 16.12.2019 is issued, it can be issued from the record. I do not find any illegality in issuing extract of earlier meeting from the record. Further ratio laid down in case law cited supra on behalf of plaintiff that, substantive rights should not be allowed to be defeated on technical grounds of procedural irregularity so as to ensure that no injustice done to any party. Further, the concept of abatement inapposite where a merger take place in the course of scheme of amalgamation sanctioned by the company court. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of view that there is no delay and moreover, ratio laid down in said case laws is applicable to the facts of the present case. Therefore, I am of the view that it is necessary to allow the amendment. If amendment is allowed to the plaintiff no prejudice would cause to the defendants. It appears that said development has taken place during pendency of the suit. Hence, I proceed to pass following order-
Order
1. Chamber summons No. 2090/2025 is hereby allowed.
2. Plaintiff is directed to carry out proposed amendment and file amended copy of plaint and supply amended copy of the plaint to the defendants on or before next date.
3. Chamber summons No. 2090/2025 disposed of accordingly.
Matter is adj to 10.04.2026 for compliance.
Next Purpose: COMPLIANCE
Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2026
Date: 10-04-2026
Business: CORAM - H.H.J. SHRI. SANGRAM S. SHINDE - (C.R.NO.81)
Adv. for plaintiff is present through VC.
His associates present and filed amended copy of plaint. TOR
Plaintiff is directed to serve amended copy plaint to other side.
Adv. for defendant is present through VC.
Matter is adj to 22-06-2026 for SJ hearing.
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2026
Date: 22-06-2026
Business: P. O. has not taken charge.
As per Standing Order dated 123/2026, the charge of C.R.No.81 is with C.R.No.83.
Board is discharged.
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 08-07-2026
Date: 08-07-2026
Business: Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
Plaintiff absent.
Adv. Arushi Gandhi i/b Divya jain present for defendant.
Due to heavy rain matter adjourned to 17-07-2026 for SJ hearing.
Judge
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 17-07-2026
Date: 17-07-2026
Business: Plaintiff absent. Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
Heard plaintiff argument on SJ.
Defendant absent. Adv. Uditya Raghuvanshi h/f Nagshree for defendant present and orally submitted that, one date be given for reply argument. Last chance granted matter be kept on next working date.
Matter adjourned to 18-07-2026 for reply argument of defendant.
Judge
Next Purpose: SUMMONS FOR JUDGEMENT HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 18-07-2026
Date: 18-07-2026
Business: Plaintiff absent. Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
Defendant absent. Adv. Darshit Jain for defendant present.
Heard argument on both side.
Defendant Advocate relied upon the case law(5)
Plaintiff Advocate relied upon the case law and Sales of Goods Act (3)
Matter adjourned to 29-07-2026 for further argument on citation.
Judge
Next Purpose: ARGUMENT P.H.
Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2026
Date: 29-07-2026
Business: Plaintiff absent. Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
Defendant absent. Adv. Udit Raghuwanshi for defendant present through VC and submitted that the Court shall recall on last date argument was advanced by both parties, now new case law can not be taken on record. Roznama discloses that further argument on citation. Already citation by plaintiff and defendant are filed on record. Today, another citation is filed on record by plaintiff, defendant Advocate to take note of the same and if possible can argue on the said citation in the interest of justice and to decide the matter on the merit. Citation is taken on record.
Advocate for defendant submitted that today on VC short date may be granted to look into the citation file today and argue.
Matter adjourned to 18-08-2026 for argument on citation.
Judge
Next Purpose: ARGUMENT P.H.
Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2026
Date: 18-08-2026
Business: Plaintiff absent. Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
Defendant absent. Adv. Aarushi Gandhi i/b Adv. Divya Jain for defendant present. Later on at 12.59 p.m. Adv. Darshit Jain a/w Arushi Gandhi i/b Divya Jain for defendant present. Heard argument of both the parties on case law.
Matter adjourned to 20-08-2026 for order on SJ.
Judge
Next Purpose: ORDER
Next Hearing Date: 20-08-2026
Date: 20-08-2026
Business: Plaintiff absent. Adv. Aditya Seetharaman i/b Adv. Vishal Shriyan for plaintiff present.
None present for defendant.
Court busy in verification of parties, dictation in judgment of Summary Suit 77 of 2025 and NM 848 of 2026.
Matter adjourned to 24-08-2026 for order on SJ.
Judge
Next Purpose: ORDER
Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2026
Date: 24-08-2026
Business: None present.
Heard Argument.
FRSR following order is passed.
ORDER
1.Summons for Judgment No.22 of 2020 in Summary Civil Suit No.668 of 2019 is hereby disposed as under -
2.Leave is granted to the defendant to defend the suit subject to depositing in this Court a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakh Only) within a period of one month from the date of order and shall file written statement within 30 days, thereafter.
3.After depositing the amount, the PLA Section is directed to invest the same into Fixed Deposit, till disposal of the suit or till further order.
4.If this conditional order of deposit is not complied within the stipulated period, as mentioned herein-above, the plaintiff shall be entitled for an ex-parte decree against defendant after obtaining a non-deposit certificate from the PLA Section.
5.Summons for Judgment No.22 of 2020 is disposed of accordingly.
Matter adjourned to 30-09-2026 for compliance.
Judge
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED
Disposal Date: 24-08-2026