Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010020772020
IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT
AT GREATER BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 763 OF 2020
IN
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.224 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT N0. 1300 OF 2018
Silver Arch Builders & Promoters ...Applicant
In the matter between-
BajranglalEriswal HUF ...Plaintiff
V/s.
Silver Arch Builders & Promoters ...Defendant
Appearance :
Ld. advocate Mr. O.P. Soni for plaintiff.
Ld. advocate Mr. Mangesh Sawant for defendant.
Coram : DR. S. D. TAWSHIKAR
C. R. NO : 61
Heard on : 13/03/2023.
Decided on : 13/03/2023
ORDER
Defendant has taken out present Notice of Motion seeking
condonation of delay of 131 days in filing reply to Summons for
Judgment.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 ORDER IN NM No.763/20
IN SUM SU NO. 1300/2018
2. Perused Notice of Motion as well as Affidavit-in-support of
it. I have also gone through the Affidavit-in-reply filed by the plaintiff
opposing the Notice of Motion.
3. Heard both the sides.
4. Ld advocate Mr. Sawant for defendant submits that as the
very employee of defendant who used to look after accounts as well as
the record and files, did not inform the defendant and he had thereafter
left the job. Thus there was no knowledge about S/J with the
responsible officers of the defendants. He further submits that due to
lack of knowledge about the service of Summons for Judgment, reply
could not be filed. He submits that delay is not intentional or deliberate.
He candidly submits that the delay may be condoned by imposing
reasonable cost.
5. Per contra, Ld advocate Mr. Soni for the plaintiff objects the
Notice of Motion. He points out that the delay is in fact of 155 days and
not 131 days. According to him the reason for delay is in fact vague and
not sufficient. He further submits that there is huge delay in filing reply
and therefore delay may not be condoned. He, in alternate, submits that
if this Court comes to the conclusion to condone the delay, heavy cost
be imposed on the defendants.
6. The suit is of 2018 and the Summons for Judgment is of
2019. The present Notice of Motion is taken out in the month of
January 2020. Considering the reasons mentioned in the affidavit-in-
support of the Notice of Motion, the reason given cannot be said to be
vague or improbable. Considering the length of delay, I do not find that
the delay is intentional or deliberate. Considering the importance of
-- 2 of 4 --
3 ORDER IN NM No.763/20
IN SUM SU NO. 1300/2018
right to defend Summons for Judgment, I am of the view that delay
needs to be condoned, however subject to imposing cost for causing
delay. Hence, the order-
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.763 of 2020 is allowed subject to cost of
Rs. 4,000/-(Rupees Four Thousand only) in terms of prayer
clause (a), which reads as under.
(a) The delay of 131 days in applying/making an
application for leave to defend for and on behalf of the
defendant in the present proceedings, may kindly be
condoned.
2. Defendant to pay cost to the plaintiff within two weeks from the
date of this order.
3. On compliance of condition as to cost, reply filed by the
defendant be taken on record.
4. Notice of Motion No.763 of 2020 is disposed of accordingly.
(Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Date- 13/03/2023. Court Room No.61
Dictated on : 13-03-2023
Transcribed on : 16-03-2023
Signed on : 21-03-2023
-- 3 of 4 --
4 ORDER IN NM No.763/20
IN SUM SU NO. 1300/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
21-03-2023 at 5.55p.m. Mrs. V. V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Dr. S.D. Tawshikar
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
13-03-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 21-03-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 21-03-2023
-- 4 of 4 --