Order 2

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: CNR NO : MHCC010021412018. 1 Chamber Summons No. 291/2018.
in L. C. Suit No. 271/2018.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 291 OF 2018.
IN
L. C. SUIT NO. 271 OF 2018.
Brahmajyoti B - Wing Mirani Tenants Association
(Proposed) and the Others. ....….….........…………. … PLAINTIFFS.
V/S.
MCGM. …...….....................................................…. ... DEFENDANT.
CORAM : SHRI. A.G. SANTANI.
(Court Room No.04).
DATED : 01st February, 2025.
APPEARANCES :
Mrs. Pooja Narvekar, Ld. Advocates for Plaintiffs.
Ms. Pooja Nagarthwar, Ld. Advocate for the Defendant/MCGM.
*****
01. The plaintiffs have taken out the Chamber Summons, 'the
Ch/s.' for short, U/O. VI Rule 17 of the CPC of 1908, for the amendment
in the plaint. Perused the Ch/s., the supporting affidavit of plaintiff No.
2 and say of the defendant. Heard.
02. Considering the record, the points for determination, along
- with my findings and the reasons therefor, are as under :
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
(1). Whether the proposed amendment is
necessary for deciding the real question
in controversy in the suit?……………..... ... Yes.
(2). What Order? …...............….................... …As per final Order.
-: REASONS FOR THE FINDINGS :-
AS TO POINT NO. 1 :
03. By filing this Ch/s., the plaintiffs contended that during the
course of arguments, the defendant alleged to have issued the notice of
dtd. 10.01.2018 against the suit building. Hence, the plaintiffs obtained
copy of the said notice and wished to file the same on this record, which
-- 1 of 4 --
CNR NO : MHCC010021412018. 2 Chamber Summons No. 291/2018.
in L. C. Suit No. 271/2018.
would not cause any prejudice to the other side. Accordingly, they asked
for permission to carry out the necessary amendment, which is more or
less in the form of production of copy of this notice annexed with this
Ch/s. In reply, the defendant denied this Ch/s., as the plaintiffs wanted
to mislead the Court. More so, there is no specific averment in the Ch/s.
that they did not possess copy of this notice. Further, while drafting this
plaint, they had it’s custody and during arguments, they learned about
the mistake committed by them. Therefore, to correct the said mistake,
they filed this Ch/s..
04. Considering the rival submissions, here, it is worth notable
that bare perusal of the plaint averments, more precisely para 19, reveal
that instead of considering the plaintiffs' letter, the Office of defendant
issued this notice on 10.01.2018, which they replied on 15.01.2018. As
such, they appointed the Structural Engineer to audit this suit building.
Moreover, they prayed for grant of perpetual injunction, restraining this
defendant from implementing this notice of dtd. 10.01.2018, U/s. 354
of the MMC Act, in view of prayer clause (b) of their plaint. In this way,
it is clear that while filing this suit itself, the plaintiff were well aware as
regards issuance of this notice and they failed to place it on the record.
It was, certainly, a lapse on their behalf. However, still, the fact remains
that although, this suit was filed in 2018, the trial is still to begin. More
so, as the plaintiffs are assailing 'propriety' of this very notice, which is
duly referred to in their plaint, it would be just to permit it's production
on record. I do agree that the plaintiff could have filed the same much
earlier and there are latches on their part in filing of the present Ch/s..
However, on that count alone, they cannot be denied of this production,
specially when this notice is required to adjudicate upon the suit issues
effectively and finally. Still, while doing so, it would also be appropriate
-- 2 of 4 --
CNR NO : MHCC010021412018. 3 Chamber Summons No. 291/2018.
in L. C. Suit No. 271/2018.
to impose costs upon them to have further delayed this matter. Hence, I
answered point No. 1 in the affirmative and in answer to point No. 2, I
pass the following Order:
-: O R D E R :-
(i). Chamber Summons No. 291/2018 is made absolute in
terms of Clause (a) only, subject to payment of costs of
Rs. 3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand) in favour of the District
Legal Services Authority, Mumbai, till the next date.
(ii). On payment of the costs, the plaintiffs are permitted to
file copy of the notice dtd. 10.01.2018, placed at Exhibit-I
of Chamber Summons, on record of suit.
(iii). Chamber Summons No. 291/2018 is, accordingly,
disposed of.
{A. G. Santani}
Mumbai. Judge,
Dated : 01.02.2025. City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 01.02.2025.
Transcribed on : 03.02.2025.
Checked and Signed on : 04.02.2025.
-- 3 of 4 --
CNR NO : MHCC010021412018. 4 Chamber Summons No. 291/2018.
in L. C. Suit No. 271/2018.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
04.02.2025 12:35 p.m. V. V. Kulkarni
NAME OF STENOGRAPHERUPLOAD DATE TIME
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
H. H. Judge Shri. A. G. Santani,
Court Room No. 4.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 01.02.2025
ORDER Typed on 03.02.2025
ORDER signed by P. O. on 04.02.2025
ORDER uploaded on 04.02.2025
-- 4 of 4 --