Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 N/M NO.1055/2020
MHCC010029982020
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1055 OF 2020
IN
SUIT No. 799 OF 2017
Swati Bhupendra Gurav ...Applicant/Orig.Deft.No.7
VERSUS
Hemant Parshuram Gurav ...Respondent/Orig.Plaintiff
Appearance
Mr. Dinesh Rajpurohit, learned Advocate for defendant No.7
Ms. Anita Borkar, learned Advocate for the plaintiff.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. R.A. SASNE (C.R.NO.62)
Date : 28th June, 2022
O R D E R
Defendant No. 7 has taken out this notice of motion for
condonation of delay in filing written statement and prayed to take his
written statement on record.
2. It is the contention of the defendant No.7 that writ of
summons was served on her on 01.04.2018. Her Advocate instructed
-- 1 of 4 --
2 N/M NO.1055/2020
her that her presence will not be required and he will call her whenever
it is required. It is her further contention that she was required to
change the Advocate and filed Vakalatnama of new Advocate on
19.10.2019. The present Advocate informed her that written statement
is not filed. With these contentions, she has prayed for condonation of
delay in filing written statement.
3. The notice of motion is opposed by the plaintiff by filing
reply. It is the contention of the plaintiff that there is no just and
sufficient reason to condone the delay. The defendant is adopting
delaying tactics in disposing of the suit. The copy of notice of motion
was served on defendant No.7 on 01.04.2017. The plaintiff reserved
notice of motion on defendant No.7. There is improper calculation of
period of delay. The writ of summons was served in the month of
December. With these contentions, the plaintiff has prayed to dismiss
the notice of motion.
4. Heard learned Advocate for defendant No.7. Read notes of
argument of defendant No.7 and heard learned Advocate for the
plaintiff.
5. According to defendant No.7, there is delay of 704 days in
filing written statement. It is the contention of defendant No.7 that her
earlier Advocate did not inform her about the status of the suit. It is her
further contention that when she changed the Advocate, her new
Advocate informed her that written statement is not filed. With these
contentions, she has prayed for condonation of delay in filing written
statement. The suit is for declaration as to ownership of the premises.
-- 2 of 4 --
3 N/M NO.1055/2020
Valuable rights of the parties are involved therein. Defendant No.7 was
required to keep track of the suit. She was required to file written
statement within specific time. It is her contention that her earlier
Advocate did not instruct her properly and asked her not to attend the
case. Considering these reasons stated in affidavit of notice of motion,
the right to defend the suit cannot be taken away. She can be allowed
to file written statement. Considering the delay caused in filing written
statement, I am of the view that the plaintiff is required to be
compensated for the same. Hence, by allowing notice of motion I pass
following order:
O R D E R
1. Notice of Motion No.1055/2020 is allowed subject to costs of
Rs.5,000/.
2. Delay in filing written statement is condoned.
3. Defendant No.7 is allowed to file written statement subject to
compliance of order as to payment of costs.
4. Costs shall be paid to the plaintiff.
5. Notice of Motion No.1055/2020 is disposed of accordingly.
(R.A. SASNE)
Judge,
City Civil Court,
Date : 28/06/2022 Mumbai.
Dictated on : 28/06/2022
transcribed on : 29/06/2022
Signed on : 30/06/2022
-- 3 of 4 --
4 N/M NO.1055/2020
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER”
30.06.2022 at 3.10 p.m. Mr. S.S. Bathe
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge(with CR No.) HHJ SHRI. R.A. SASNE (C.R.No.62)
Date of pronouncement of Order 28/06/2022
Order signed by P.O. on 30/06/2022
Order uploaded on 30/06/2022
-- 4 of 4 --