Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM 623/2018 SUIT 891/2017 1
CNR.NO. MHCC010023832018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.623 of 2018
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO.100891 OF 2017
M/s.Neptune Container Line And Logistics Pvt.Ltd. . .. Applicant
IN THE MATTER OF
M/s.Trans Asian Shipping Services Pvt.Ltd. .......Plaintiff
Versus
M/s.Neptune Container Line And Logistics Pvt.Ltd. .. .. Defendant
Shri. Kumar Kothari advocate for the Plaintiff.
Shri.Anil Vaishnavi advocate for the Defendant.
Coram : Her Honour Judge
Smt. Pushpa N. Rao
Ad hoc Asstt.Judge
C.R no. : 32
Date : 5th May 2018
ORDER
1. Defendants have taken out this notice of motion for condonation
of delay of 184 days in filing written statement.
2. Defendant company served the writ of summons on 17/05/2017.
Defendants had appointed advocate Ashwin Shankar to represent them
in the matter. Since the advocate of the defendant was traveling
extensively overseas it took some time for the written statement to be
finalized. The written statement was finalized in August 2017 but as the
matter was posted in December 2017 therefore, written statement could
not be tendered in the court therefore, delay has been causes in filing
-- 1 of 3 --
NM 623/2018 SUIT 891/2017 2
the written statement. Delay is not intentional hence, delay be
condoned and defendant be allowed to file their written statement on
record.
3. Plaintiff filed the reply on the motion itself. Delay is not justified
hence, application be rejected with costs.
4. Heard learned advocate Shri. Kumar Kothari for the Plaintiff and
advocate Shri.Anil Vaishnavi for the Defendant.
5. The writ of summons was served on defendant company on
17/05/2017. Therefore, it was expected from the defendant to file its
written statement within a period of 30 days or on recorded reasons
within 90 days.
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 defendant. 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. Considering the nature of the suit, defendant is a company if a
written statement of the defendant is not taken on record serious
prejudice will be caused to the defendant. 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.3000/(Rs.Three Thousand only) be paid to the plaintiff
then that will be justifiable for the interest of both the parties. Hence, I
-- 2 of 3 --
NM 623/2018 SUIT 891/2017 3
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 623/2018 is made absolute by imposing
cost of Rs.3000/(Rs.Three Thousand only) be paid to the
plaintiff.
2. After compliance the written statement of defendant be taken on
record.
Date : 05/05/2018 (Pushpa N. Rao)
Ad Hoc Asst.Judge
Bombay City Civil Court
Greater Mumbai
Dictation Direct typed on computer: 05/05/2018
Signed by HHJ on : 05/05/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
05/05/2018 at ( 5.35p.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
05/05/2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
05/05/2018
JUDGMENT/ ORDER uploaded on 05/05/2018
.
-- 3 of 3 --