Date: 15-02-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: CHAMBER SUMMONS
Next Hearing Date: 25-03-2019
Date: 25-03-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: CHAMBER SUMMONS
Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2019
Date: 26-04-2019
Business: Resumed.
Adv. Castelino for plaintiff is present. None for defendants.
The defendant have not file reply to Ch/s. Ch/s be heard without reply.
Adjd for Ch/s arguments to 05.07.2019.
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 05-07-2019
Date: 05-07-2019
Business: Court is busy in hearing Notice of Motion in suit no.8489/1993 which is Hon\''ble High Court Time Bound matter and court has to her Notice of Motion in suit no.1398/09, hence case is adjourned to 01/08/2019
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 01-08-2019
Date: 01-08-2019
Business: Court is busy in hearing NM in suit no.1400/19 and suit stamp no.6760/19, hence case is adjourned to 26/08/2019.
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2019
Date: 26-08-2019
Business: CA of Plaintiff present and requested to keep back the matter.
None present for Defendant.
K.B.
L.O. at 3.50 p.m.
Advocate Castlino for Plaintiff present
Heard Plaintiff\''s advocate for Chamber Summons no.311/19. It is submitted that Defendants have not filed reply to Chamber Summons and proposed amendment in the suit is necessary for bringing the fact on record that the building from suit premises is demolished by Defendants.
Case is adjourned to 13/09/2019 for order on Chamber Summons no.311/19.
Next Purpose: CH/S ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2019
Date: 13-09-2019
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
None present for Defendant.
Court is busy in dictating Judgment in suit no.3932/10, hence case is adjourned to 26/09/2019 for order.
Next Purpose: CH/S ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2019
Date: 26-09-2019
Business: Advocate for Plaintiff present.
None present for Defendant.
ORDER ON CHS NO.311/19
This Chamber Summons is taken out by Plaintiff for amendment in the plaint as shown in the schedule.
Plaintiff\''s CA Suryakant Bait has filed affidavit in support of Chamber Summons contending that this suit is filed for various reliefs claimed in the suit. It is contended that Plaintiff was under erroneous assumption that Plaintiff had executed development agreement in pursuance to MOU executed between Plaintiff on oner side and Defendant nos.2 and 3 on other side.
In a criminal case no.3400063/SW/2009 filed before 34th Metropolitan Magistrate, Vikhroli, Mumbai by Defendant no.3. It is alleged that Plaintiff and Defendant no.1 and 2 have played fraud upon Defendant no.3 by executing conveyance deed and handing over possession of suit plot to Defendant no.1. Hence, Plaintiff came to know about allegations made in respect of conveyance deed and alleged fraud. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed Criminal Revision Application no.409/10 to quash issue process order passed by said Metropolitan Magistrate Court. Said Criminal Revision Application is allowed on merits vide order dated 30/11/2011. Defendant nos.1 and 2 also have filed same Criminal Revision Application but Plaintiff came to know that complaint filed by Defendant no.3 is pending before Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Vikhroli. Defendant no.3 and her husband had filed Criminal writ petition no.598/12 before Hon\''ble High Court challenging order passed in Criminal Revision Application no.409/10 and said writ petition came to be dismissed on 25/09/2013. Plaintiff came to know that Defendant nos.1 and 2 have demolished the building for re-development therefore he filed this suit for declaration of conveyance deed as null and void against Plaintiff. Said suit was dismissed and thereafter the building is demolished. It is contended that since Defendants have altered suit plot by demolishing suit structure, it has becomes necessary for Plaintiff to amend the plaint as shown in the schedule annexed to the Chamber Summons. Hence, Plaintiff has prayed to allow Chamber Summons.
Defendants have not filed their reply to Chamber Summons and Plaintiffs advocate argued that the Chamber Summons is necessary to be made absolute for bringing on record the fact that structure from suit premises is demolished by Defendants. Considering the fact that Plaintiff is intending to bring on record subsequent development, I find that Chamber Summons is necessary to be made absolute. Further, def s have not resisted Chamber Summons inspite of giving sufficient opportunity, hence I proceed to pass following order-
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons no.311 of 2019 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) of Chamber Summons.
2. Plaintiff is directed to carry out proposed amendment in the plaint within stipulated time provided by law.
3. Plaintiff is further directed to serve the copies of amended plaint upon Defendants and to file typed copy of amended plaint for the record of the court.
Case is adjourned to 16/11/2019 for Compliance.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 26-09-2019