Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: :1: NM-516-18 Suit 1583-14
CNR NO.MHCC010020072018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 516 OF 2018
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 1583 of 2014
1. Deepa Devanand Gaikwad ]
2. Kaveri Devanand Gaikwad ].. Plaintiffs.
Versus
Michael Sebastian Joseph ].. Defendant.
CORAM: HER HONOUR JUDGE
BHARTI KALE
(C.R. No. 4).
DATE: 31st March, 2018.
Adv. Mendadkar for the plaintiffs present.
Adv. Khopade for the defendant present.
ORDER
The plaintiffs have taken out this notice of motion for
correction of roznama dated 29/01/2018 regarding the sentence that
“defendant” is in possession of the property.
2. It is stated that while restoration of the notice of motion
No.3510 of 2018 the Advocate for the defendant Shri Thorat made a
-- 1 of 4 --
:2: NM-516-18 Suit 1583-14
statement that defendant is in possession of the suit property. It is
stated that at the time of filing of the suit, plaintiffs were in possession
of the suit property. There is injunction order operating against both
the plaintiffs and the defendant is that not to enter in the suit premises.
In view of the orders in writ petition, passed by the Hon,ble High Court
the defendant has made a incorrect statement that he is in possession.
It is stated that it was noticed that some persons were trying to break
open the lock of the plaintiffs put on the shutter of the suit premises
and therefore a report was lodged. Therefore, the instant notice of
motion.
3. The defendant filed reply denying therein the contents of
the notice of motion. It is stated that the plaintiffs are trying to delay
the suit. It is stated that whatever statement was made is as per the
record of this court.
4. Heard Advocate for the plaintiffs and defendant.
5. Advocate for the plaintiffs has submitted that in view of the
order passed by the Hon’ble High Court both the parties are restrained
from entering the suit premises. He has taken me through the
photographs to show that the defendant has entered into the suit
premises inspite of the order of the court and wrong statement was
made before the court that the defendant is in possession of the suit
premises.
6. The defendant has categorically denied that he has entered
-- 2 of 4 --
:3: NM-516-18 Suit 1583-14
the suit premises by committing breach of the order of the Hon’ble High
Court. He has submitted that there were two premises. This fact is
denied by the plaintiffs. At this stage, this court has to consider the
limited prayer of the plaintiffs about the correction to be made in the
roznama because for other contention raised by the plaintiffs, they may
take out other proceedings. The plaintiffs have submitted that the
statement recorded in the roznama be deleted. The defendant has
submitted that he has made statement only in respect of the of symbolic
possession and not actual possession. Now, the roznama is recorded by
the court noting whatever has happened on that day. As the defendant
has submitted that he is in possession of the property and he is not
going to dispose of the suit property, the said statement was recorded
by the court. Now, it will be for the plaintiff to take out proper
proceeding, but they cannot ask the court to delete the factual recording
done by this court in the roznama. Therefore, I do not find any merits
in the notice of motion. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
Notice of Motion No.516 of 2018 is dismissed and
accordingly disposed of.
(BHARTI KALE )
Judge
City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Date : 31/03/2018
Dictated on: 31/03/2018
Transcribed on: 02/04/2018
Signed on: 02/04/2018
-- 3 of 4 --
:4: NM-516-18 Suit 1583-14
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
03/04/2018 at 11.00 a.m
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME (DASTAGIR B. MULLA)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.
H.H.J. BHARTI KALE (Court
Room No.4)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
31/03/2018
Judgment/Order signed by P.O.on 02/04/2018
Judgment/Order uploaded on 03/04/2018
-- 4 of 4 --