Date: 11-03-2019
Business: Adv. Yashpal Jain for plff. present.
Adv. Sarthak Shah for deft. present and has filed registered Ch/sum No.512/19 along with supporting affd t.o.r.
The Ld. adv. of the defts submits that their Ch/sum impleading their minor son be decided before the plff. N/M is decided. According to him, the rights of their son would be prejudiced if Ch/sum is not decided first. I do not find that Ch/sum is necessary to be given priority before the N/M. Hence, the N/M of the plffs who are parents of the D/1 shall be decided first. Parties to take not that on next date the N/M shall be heard for its final disposal. Matter is adjd. to. 11.04.2019 for hearing on N/M No.3247/18 and hearing on Ch/sum No.512/19.
Next Purpose: C/S HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 11-04-2019
Date: 11-04-2019
Business: Adv. for plff. present.
Deft. and his adv. absent.
Matter is adjd. to. 30.04.2019 for hearing on N/M.
As the plff. is Sr. citizen, as per the office order 66 of 2019 of Hon\''ble Principal Judge this matter will have to be transferred Court Room No.09 constituted for cases pertaining to Sr. Citizens and accordingly this case be transferred to C.R.No.9. Parties to remain present on next date before C.R.No.09.
Next Purpose: C/S HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2019
Date: 30-04-2019
Business: Advocate for Plaintiff present Advocate Ms. Shweta Shah for Defendant present and filed affidavit for inspection of documents, t.o.r. Copy served upon advocate for Plaintiff. As submitted by both advocates another suit no.714/09 is connected with suit no.1972/18 and both suits are necessary to be fixed on one day. As connected suit no.714/09 is adjourned on 12/06/2019, this suit also adjourned to 12/06/2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: CHAMBER SUMMONS
Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2019
Date: 12-06-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: CHAMBER SUMMONS
Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2019
Date: 23-07-2019
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
None present for Defendants.
Case is adjourned to 19/08/2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2019
Date: 23-07-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2019
Date: 19-08-2019
Business: Court is busy in hearing and dictating order on Notice of Motion no.2080/19 in suit no.7386/06 and at the time of dictating order on Notice of Motion no.2080/19, electricity supply has disconnected, hence remaining board of second session is discharged and case is adjourned to 18/10/2019.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2019
Date: 18-10-2019
Business: Advocate Smita for Plaintiff present
Advocate Sarthak Shah for Defendant present
By consent, case is adjourned to 11/12/2019 for hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 11-12-2019
Date: 11-12-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Yashpal Jain along with advocate Mr. Dhrusti Chheda and advocate Smita Chaudhary for Plaintiff present
Advocate Mr. Sarthak Shah and advocate Ms. Shweta Shah i/b Sarthak Shah and Associates for Defendant present
ORDER ON CHS NO.512/19
This Chamber Summons is filed on behalf of minor applicant Kush Anuj Shah for impleading him as Defendant in this suit. It is pertinent to note here that affidavit filed in support of Chamber Summons is filed by Mr. Anuj Shah as father and natural guardian of minor applicant Kush and on perusal of the plaint it is noticed that Mr. Anuj is Defendant no.1 of this suit. Mr. Anuj in his affidavit filed in support of Chamber Summons has contended that minor Kush being legal heir of Defendants has right, title and interest in suit premises which was admittedly purchased by grand parents of minor Kush, hence according to applicant suit property is ancestral property therefore he is necessary party to the Defendant.
Plaintiff has filed a detailed affidavit of reply contending that this is the suit filed for simple injunction and minor applicant Kush can not be necessary party to the suit.
Heard applicant\''s advocate and Plaintiff\''s advocate at length. Perused plaint. On perusal of prayer clauses from the plaint it is noticed by me that this is the simple suit for injunction filed against Defendant no.1 and 2. It is settled principle of law that injunction suit can be filed only against the person who are causing obstruction in the peaceful possession of Plaintiff or against the person who are causing damage to property of Plaintiff. The cause of action for filing injunction suit will arise against the person causing obstruction into possession or against the persons from whom there is apprehension of obstruction or apprehension of damages to the property in question. I am unable to understand as to how the minor applicant can create obstruction into alleged possession of Plaintiff over suit premises and as to how minor can understand that he is necessary party to this suit. On perusing the plaint and after giving I have given serious consideration to the submissions it is noticed by me that Defendant no.1 as his father and natural guardian of minor applicant is intending to drag minor applicant to this litigation. It seems that said move is taken by Defendant no.1 to get sympathy from the court however it is settled principle of law that court of law can not get swed away by emotions and all the orders to be passed by the court of law should be passed only in the four corners of law and they should stand on merits. It seems that parties to this suit for their ego are raising quarrel against each other and in the unfortunate quarrel between Plaintiff and Defendant now Defendant no.1 is intending to drag minor applicant If it will be allowed no purpose will be served and unnecessarily name of minor will appear in a litigation to which he has no concern at all. Hence, I find that to satisfy the ego of Defendant no.1 Chamber Summons can not be allowed and minor applicant can not be dragged into unnecessary litigation. While arguing Defendant\''s advocate has pointed out that already one suit no.714/19 on behalf of minor applicant is filed in this court and after giving serious consideration to said submission I have come to conclusion that if at all applicant is entitled to any reliefs he may claim all such reliefs in the suit filed on behalf of him and if such prayers will be made they can be decided on merits in said suit. Any how minor applicant can not be Defendant to injunction suit because minor applicant can not create obstruction into possession of suit property or minor can not damage the property in question and all such work can be done by the devil mind of this party to this suit. Hence, I proceed to pass following order -
ORDER
Chamber Summons no.512 of 2019 stands dismissed/disposed off.
Case is adjourned to 09/01/2020 for NM hearing.
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED
Disposal Date: 11-12-2019