Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: ..1.. NM No.676/2020
MHCC010017852020
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.676 OF 2020
(CNR NO.MHCC01-001785-2020)
IN
SUMMARY CIVIL SUIT NO.7 OF 2019
Ramprasad Ramswaroop Yadav )...Plaintiff
Versus
Lamfa Projects Pvt. Ltd. and others. )...Defendants
Appearances :-
Learned Advocate S. R. Gupta for plaintiff.
Learned Advocate Ashwin Rana for defendant Nos.1 to 4.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHAIKH AKBAR SHAIKH JAFAR
COURT ROOM NO.15
DATE : 23/08/2023.
ORDER
1 This notice of motion is taken out by the defendant No.4
for condonation of delay and allowing the Defendant No.4 to tender his
appearance by setting aside the ex-parte order dated 22/03/2019. It is
contended that Defendant No.1 is a company and defendant Nos. 2 to 4
are the directors. Defendant No.4 had resigned the company on
01/04/2018 and has not received the writ of summons personally,
-- 1 of 4 --
..2.. NM No.676/2020
therefore, prayed for condonation of delay and setting aside the ex-
parte order with permission to tender his appearance.
2 The plaintiff resisted the contention by filing reply
contending that the delay is not properly explained and the contention
mentioned in the notice of motion is false, no case is made out for
condonation of delay and prayed for rejection of notice of motion.
3 Heard rival parties at length.
4 It appears from the record and report of writ of summons
that the summons was received by defendant No.1 for all defendants. It
is the contention of the plaintiff that when the defendant No.1 company
received the summons through authorized persons for all defendants, it
is presumed that the writ of summons is served to all the defendants.
But copy of document annexed with the notice of motion shows that the
defendant No.4 has left the company and his position as a director in
the year 2018. It is fairly admitted by the learned advocate for the
plaintiff that the writ of summons is not personally served on the
defendants. Thus, I am of the view that it is a fit case to condone the
delay and to allow defendant No.4 to tender his appearance.
Consequently, I proceed to pass the following order :-
ORDER
1. Notice of motion No.676/2020 in Summary Civil Suit
No.7/2019, is hereby allowed.
2. Delay stands condoned.
3. Order dated 22/03/2019, stands set aside.
-- 2 of 4 --
..3.. NM No.676/2020
4. Defendant No.4 is permitted to tender his appearance.
5. Vakalatnama already tendered be taken on record and
be exhibited.
6. Notice of motion disposed of accordingly.
(Order dictated and pronounced in open Court)
(Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar)
Judge,
City Civil Court, Greater Bombay
Dated : 23/08/2023 C.R. No.15
Dictated on : 23/08/2023
Transcribed on : 24/08/2023
Signed by HHJ on : 24/08/2023
-- 3 of 4 --
..4.. NM No.676/2020
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
25/08/2023
at about 12.45 p.m.
(Ms. Sonali S. Sawant)
Stenographer (Grade-III)
Name of the Hon'ble Judge : Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar,
Judge, City Civil Court &
Addl. Sessions Judge
Court Room No.15, Gr. Mumbai
Date of pronouncement of Order : 23/08/2023
Order signed by Hon'ble Judge on : 24/08/2023
Order uploaded on : 25/08/2023
at about 12.45 p.m.
-- 4 of 4 --