Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: MHCC010024542019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT
AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 486 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1225 OF 2017
M/s. Assured Advertising and Media Pvt.Ltd. ]...Plaintiff
V/s.
E.D.M.D. Infracon Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ]...Defendants
Appearance :
Ld. Adv Sayli Hajela for the plaintiff
Ld. Adv. Sahil Mahajan for the defendants.
CORAM : HHJ SHRI K. P. SHRIKHANDE
C. R. NO. : 61
DATE : 18/09/2023.
O R D E R
( Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
This chamber summons is taken out by defendants No.1 to 4 for
condonation of delay in filing Vakalatnama.
2. According to the defendants, there is delay of 365 days in
filing the Vakalatnama and the said delay is not deliberate, but it was
bonafide and caused for the reasons beyond their control. The Ld
counsel for the defendants submits that, if the delay in filing the
Vakalatnama is not condoned, then great prejudice would be caused to
-- 1 of 5 --
2 CHS No.486/2019 in Sum
SU No.1225/2017
the defendants as the doors of justice would permanently be closed in
that event, and as such prayed for condonation of delay.
3. The plaintiff has filed reply and resisted the chamber
summons with the submission that the defendants were duly served in
the month of November, 2017 and they were well aware of the present
suit. When the defendants found that the adverse orders may be
caused against them, they took out the present chamber summons.
According to the plaintiff, no valid and bonafide reason for
condonation of delay is there, and as such prayed for rejecting the
chamber summons.
4. On going through the chamber summons, reply and
taking into consideration submissions of both the sides, it is found that
present suit is a Summary Suit and on serving the writ of summons,
the defendants had to cause their appearance within 10 days. It is
appearing that the writ of summons was served on the defendants on
05-12-2017 and the present chamber summons is moved on
25-02-2019. Thus, there is delay of 447 days and not 365 days as
mentioned in the present chamber summons.
5. It may be seen that defendant No.1 is a company and
defendants No.2 to 4 are its directors. It is stated that the writ of
summons was received by the employee of defendant No.1 and the
said employee failed to inform promptly to the defendants about
receiving the writ of summons, and defendant No.4 came to know
about the present suit on 12-12-2018, when one of the staff of the
defendant No.1 checked the website of the City Civil & Court and
thereafter defendant No.4 informed the advocate and then the
advocate took the steps to appear before the Court. However, there
-- 2 of 5 --
3 CHS No.486/2019 in Sum
SU No.1225/2017
was already delay in causing appearance and therefore, mere
appearance was not sufficient and present chamber summons was to
be taken out and therefore, after coming to know about the present
case on 12-12-2018, the present chamber summons moved on
25-02-2019.
6. Ld counsel for the defendants further submits that many
investors of the projects have filed criminal cases against the
defendants and therefore the defendants were engaged and busy in
handling those criminal cases and defendant No.4 had to surrender
before the Investigating Agency and thereafter he was in jail. It is
further submits that defendant No.2 was out of the country for the
medical treatment, and therefore it was practically impossible to
promptly attend before this Court. It is further contends that the
reason of delay in filing the Vakalatnama is bonafide and not
deliberate, and as such prayed for condonation of delay. Though the
chamber summons is resisted and prayed for rejection by the plaintiff,
having regard to the reason assigned by the defendants for not causing
the appearance promptly within 10 days and, having regard to the
explanation given for the delay in taking out the present chamber
summons, I am of the view that, the delay is not deliberate and
therefore, it needs to be condoned. However, while condoning the
delay, certain reasonable costs needs to be imposed. In the result, I
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No.486/2019 is hereby allowed.
2. Delay in filing the appearance/Vakalatnama is condoned and
ex-parte order dated 28-03-2018 passed in Sum Suit
No.1225/2017 is set aside, subject to costs of Rs.3,000/-.
-- 3 of 5 --
4 CHS No.486/2019 in Sum
SU No.1225/2017
3. After paying the costs to the plaintiff or depositing it in the
court, the appearance/Vakalatnama of the defendants shall be
taken on record.
4. The defendants shall pay/deposit the amount on or before
06-10-2023.
5. Chamber Summons No.486/2019 stands disposed of
accordingly.
( K. P. Shrikhande )
Judge, City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Date- 18-09-2023 Court Room No.61
Dictated on : 18-09-2023
transcribed on:20-09-2023
Corrected & signed on : 29-09-2023
-- 4 of 5 --
5 CHS No.486/2019 in Sum
SU No.1225/2017
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
29-09-2023 at 5.15p.m. Mrs. V. V. Malgaonkar
Name of the Judge
(with Court Room No.)
Shri K. P. Shrikhande
C.R. No.61
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
18-09-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P. O. on 29-09-2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 29-09-2023
-- 5 of 5 --