Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM 547/2018 SUIT NO.2300/2017 1
CNR.NO.MHCC01 0020982018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.547 OF 2018
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 2300 OF 2017
Mr.Mansukh Valji Gala .. .. Plaintiff
Versus
Adhiraj Media And Entertainment Pvt.Ltd.& Ors. ...Defendants
Smt.A.L.Vora advocate for the Plaintiff.
Shri.S.H.Bohara advocate for the Defendants.
Coram : Her Honour Judge
Smt. Pushpa N. Rao
Ad hoc Dist.Judge
CR No. : 32
Dated : 20th August 2018
ORDER
1. Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 taken out this notice of motion for
condonation of delay of 48 days in filing written statement.
2. Writ of summons was served on defendants on 07/11/2017
thereafter, learned advocate for defendants by his letter dated
21/11/2017 called upon the plaintiff to give the instructions of original
documents as mentioned in the annexure of the plaint. On 13/01/2008
advocate for the plaintiff party give the inspection of the documents but
inspection of the statement of account was not provided. Due to the non
-- 1 of 3 --
NM 547/2018 SUIT NO.2300/2017 2
inspection of document by plaintiff in time, delay occurred in filing
written statement. Delay is not intentional hence, be condoned in the
interest of justice.
3. Plaintiff filed the reply on the motion itself that no valid reasons
are assigned by the defendants for condonation of delay, hence, motion
be dismissed with costs.
4. Heard advocates Smt.A.L.Vora for the Plaintiff and
Shri.S.H.Bohara for the Defendants.
5. The writ of summons was served on defendants on 07/11/2017
therefore, advocate for the defendants issued a letter for inspection of
the documents annexed with the plaint. Plaintiff has provided partly
inspection of documents to the defendant that is not denied by plaintiff.
As inspection of the statement of account was not provided to the
defendants hence, defendants could not file their written statement
within time.
6. The purpose of providing a time schedule for filing written
statement under Order 8 Rule 1 is to expedite and not scuttle the
hearing. The provisions spells a disability on the defendants. It does not
impose on embargo on power of court to extend the time. The provision
being in the domain of procedural law it has to be held directory and
not mandatory.
7. Suit is for recovery of Rs.18,41,000/ against defendants.
Defendant No.1 is a company if a written statement of the defendant is
not taken on record serious prejudice will be caused to the defendants.
-- 2 of 3 --
NM 547/2018 SUIT NO.2300/2017 3
The reasons for not filing the written statement is found to be justified
therefore, I am of the view that, if the delay in filing the written
statement is condoned by imposing costs of Rs.2000/(Rs.Two
Thousand only) be paid to the plaintiff then that will be justifiable for
the interest of both the parties. Hence, I proceed to pass following
order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion no. 547 of 2018 is made absolute in terms of
prayer clause.
2. Delay in filing written statement is hereby condoned by
imposing cost of Rs.2000/(Rs.Two Thousand only) be paid to
the plaintiff on or before next date
3. After compliance the written statement of defendants be taken
on record.
Dated : 20/08/2018 (Pushpa N. Rao)
Ad Hoc Dist. Judge
Bombay City Civil Court
Greater Mumbai
ERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
21.08.2018 at (3.20 p.m.) Mrs. J.V.Pawar
Name of the Judge (With Court room
No.)
HHJ Smt.Pushpa N Rao
C.R.No.32
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
20/08/2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
20/08/2018
JUDGMENT/ ORDER uploaded on 21.08.2018
.
-- 3 of 3 --