Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: CS 296/2020 1 IN L.C. SU NO.2836/2019
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.296 OF 2020
CNR NO.MHCC010019292020
IN
L.C. SUIT NO.2836 OF 2019
CNR NO.MHCC010103502019
Mr. Vinay Madhav Kulkarni ]… Plaintiff
Versus
Mr. Hemant Hareshwar Mhatre and Ors. ]...Defendants
Adv. Deepak Raut for plaintiff
Adv Aditya Pratap for defendant No.1
Adv. Chemburkar for defendant No.2
Adv. Khandagale h/f Adv. Tondwalkar for defendant Nos.3 to 6
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
Shri S.D.Kulkarni
(Court Room no.4)
DATED : 29th April, 2022
O R A L O R D E R
1. Perused Chamber Summons, affidavit in support thereof,
reply filed by the defendants, written notes of argument submitted by
defendant No.2. Heard all the advocates at length.
2. The plaintiff has taken out this Chamber Summons to carry
out amendment. I have gone through the schedule of the amendment
therein plaintiff has contended that after filing of the suit defendant
No.1 and 2 illegally joining hands with each other tried to create third
party interest. They have contacted to buyer to purchase the suit
-- 1 of 4 --
CS 296/2020 2 IN L.C. SU NO.2836/2019
premises. Therefore, plaintiff wants to add necessary prayer that
defendant be restrained from creating any third party interest in the suit
property.
3. The defendant No.2, opposed the Chamber Summons by
filing reply, affidavit on record and contended that the relief sought by
the plaintiff is time barred. The plaintiff is not entitled for the relief as
prayed. The plaintiff is making false statement that defendants are tried
to encroach and grab the land hence, prayed for rejection of Chamber
Summons.
4. Perused Chamber Summons, affidavit in support thereof,
reply filed by the defendants. Heard all the advocates at length. Perused
written argument by defendant No.2. The plaintiff has filed the present
suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from making any
construction over the suit property. Now the plaintiff wants to add that
defendant by restraining from creating any third party interest.
Considering the fact that plaintiff and defendants are neighborer and
there is a dispute in between them since long in various revenue offices.
5. The plaintiff submitted that defendant No.1 executed the
Gift Deed in favour of the defendant No.2 but it is only a paper transfer.
Like wise defendant may also transfer the suit property so, as to defeat
the claim of the plaintiff. Therefore, in my opinion if amendment is
allowed nature of the suit will not be change and no hardship will cause
to the defendant. On the other hand defendant will get rights to file
additional written statement to put up his case. But if, proposed
amendment is refused and plaintiff will suffer hardship. Therefore, in
-- 2 of 4 --
CS 296/2020 3 IN L.C. SU NO.2836/2019
my opinion plaintiff is entitled for the amendment as prayed.
Considering this I pass the following order:
ORDER
1. Prayer clause (a) of Chamber Summons No.296 of 2020 is allowed
and made absolute.
2. The plaintiff is directed to carry out the amendment within
stipulated period.
3. Amended copy of the plaint be serve to the defendants
4. Chamber Summons No.296 of 2020 in L.C. Suit No.2836 of 2019 is
disposed of accordingly.
(S.D.Kulkarni)
Adhoc Judge,
City Civil Court,
Date : 29.04.2022 Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 29.04.2022
Transcribed on : 30.04.2022
Signed by HHJ on: 02.05.2022
-- 3 of 4 --
CS 296/2020 4 IN L.C. SU NO.2836/2019
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 11.00 a.m.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Mrs. J.S. Chavan
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. S.D.Kulkarni
C.R. no.04
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
30.04.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
02.05.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
10.05.2022
-- 4 of 4 --