Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 02 Apr 2019 · CNR MHCC010031202019
Order Details: Notice of Motion Pdf Text: NM No. 12072019 in SUM SUIT NO. 13602017 IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1207 OF 2019 IN SUMMARY SUIT NO. 1360 OF 2017 (CNR NO. MHCC010031192019) Bharat Hirji Shah ….Plaintiff Versus M/s. Chirag Corporation & Others …. Defendants Appearance: Shri. Jitendra Ranawat, Advocate for plaintiff. Smt. Leena Sapra, Advocate for defendants. CORUM : SMT. S.S. NAGUR, AD HOC JUDGE & ASST. SESSIONS JUDGE, (C.R.NO.13) DATE : 02/04/2019 ORAL ORDER 1) The notice of Motion is filed by defendant to stay the hearing of summons for judgment till final disposal of Notice of Motion No. 2362/18, 2363/18 and 2364/18. The notice of Motion is supported by affidavit of defendant stating that the notice of motion are filed under order 7 Rule 11 of code of civil procedure to reject the plaint on the ground of maintainability. Hence prayed to allow the notice of Motion. 2) Advocate for plaintiff stated that he will argue the notice of motion and will not file reply. 3) Heard Advocate Smt Leena Sapra for defendant and Advocate Shri. Jeetendra Ranawat for plaintiff. Perused the contents of Notice of Motion. ...1/ -- 1 of 4 -- NM No. 12072019 in SUM SUIT NO. 13602017 2 4) I have also gone through the record. The plaintiff has filed the summary suit for recovery from the defendants. The defendants have filed three notice of motions seeking same relief by the three defendants individually. The contents of the affidavit of notice of Motion is nothing but as good as arguments stating how the suit is not maintainable. The advocate for defendant is objecting for hearing of summons for judgment together with the notice of motion on the ground that the above notice of motion filed by defendants about the maintainability of the suit will decide the suit itself in case defendants succeed. On the other hand Adv. Ranawat for plaintiff argued that three different notice of motions seeking same relief are filed by the Defendant. Now this motion is only by defendant No. 5 and has no authority of the other defendants and the present notice of motion is filed only to prolong the decision of the suit. 5) The three notice of motions which the defendants have filed under order 7 rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure is about the maintainability of the suit and reject the plaint. Therefore these notice of motions needs to be heard and thereafter only the argument of Summons for judgment on the basis of decision could be taken up for hearing. Hence pass following order: ORDER 1. The notice of motion is allowed. 2. The parties are directed to argue the three notice of motion filed by the ...2/ -- 2 of 4 -- NM No. 12072019 in SUM SUIT NO. 13602017 3 defendant under order 7 rule 11 of the CPC. 3. Accordingly Notice of Motion is disposed of. (S.S. Nagur) Date : 02/04/2019 AdHoc Judge & Asst. Sessions Judge, City Civil Court, Greater Mumbai. Dictated on : 02/04/2019 Transcribed on : 04/05/2019 Signed on : 04/05/2019 ...3/ -- 3 of 4 -- NM No. 12072019 in SUM SUIT NO. 13602017 4 “CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT, COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER” DATE & TIME OF UPLOADING : NAME OF STENOGRAPHER 04.05.2019 & 5.32 p.m. : Mrs. S.A. Shekade (LG) Name of the Judge (with Court no.) : HHJ Smt. S.S. Nagur (CR no. 13) Date of pronouncement of Judgment/ : 02.04.2019 Order Judgment/Order signed by the P.O. on : 04.05.2019 Judgment/Order uploaded on : 04.05.2019 ...4/ -- 4 of 4 --
