Final Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: S.C.Suit No. 1463/2020. 1 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.14).
MHCC010031282020
Presented on : 12-03-2020
Registered on : 16-12-2020
Decided on : 24-04-2023
Duration : 3 years, 1 months, 12 days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
S. C. SUIT NO. 1463 OF 2020
EXHIBIT NO.14.
1. Mr. Manohar D. Dangle )
Aged 75 occupations retired )
2. Mr. Rajesh Manohar Dangle )
Aged 49 occupations service )
Adult Indian Inhabitant )
Residing at A7, Veer Sidhanak Society )
Shivshrushti, Kurla (East), )
Mumbai – 400 024 )...Plaintiffs
Versus
TSR DARASHAW Consultants )
Private Limited, )
Corporate company registered under )
Companies Act 1956 )
Through its concern person )
Having registered address at 610, )
Haji Moosa Patrawala Industrial Estate )
20, Dr. E. Moses Road, Near Famous Studio, )
Malakshmi (West), Mumbai – 400 011 )...Defendant
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI R.R.BHAGWAT.
(COURT ROOM NO.66).
DATE : 24th APRIL, 2023.
-- 1 of 5 --
S.C.Suit No. 1463/2020. 2 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.14).
SUIT FOR MANDATORY INJUNCTION
Shri S.K.Pise, Advocate for the plaintiffs.
None for the defendant (exparte).
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 24th April, 2023)
1. This is a suit for mandatory injunction.
2. Case of the plaintiffs, in brief, is as under :
Plaintiff no.1 is father and plaintiff no.2 is brother of
deceased Anil Manohar Dangle (died on 14/10/2019) who was holding
shares of SIA0005459/1715 of Siemens Ltd. Unit jointly with the
plaintiff and employees of Siemens Company. When Anil Dangle was
alive, the defendant issued letter dated 26/11/2018 in the name of Anil
Dangle for conversion of shares into dematerialized from unit Siemens
Limited, but the said conversion has not been effected till the death of
Anil Dangle due to original share certificate was missing. After death of
Anil Dangle, the plaintiffs had taken search of the original share
certificates, but they did not trace out the same. Therefore, the plaintiff
sent request letter dated 14/11/2019 to the defendant. The defendant
replied on 27/11/2019 stating that they are unable to issue duplicate
share certificate without order of the Court. Therefore, the plaintiffs
filed the suit for direction to the defendant to cancel the original share
certificate and issue duplicate share certificate in respect of shares
SIA0005459 (SIEMENS) in plaintiff's favour with costs of the suit.
3. The defendant is duly served with writ of summons as per
Bailiff Report dated 30/08/2022, but it failed to appear. Therefore, ex
-- 2 of 5 --
S.C.Suit No. 1463/2020. 3 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.14).
parte order is passed against the defendant in roznama dated
23/01/2023. The plaintiff examined PW 1 Manohar on Exh.6 and
proved documents filed with list Exh.7. Documents are marked as Exh.8
to 12. The plaintiffs closed evidence vide pursis (Exh.13). Heard learned
counsel Shri S.K.Pise for the plaintiffs.
4. After considering pleadings of the plaintiffs and evidence
on record, following points arose for my determination with my
findings against them with reasons to follow :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Do the plaintiffs prove that they are
entitled to the relief of direction to the
defendant to cancel the original share
certificate and issue duplicate share
certificate in respect of shares
SIA0005459 (SIEMENS) in their favour ? In the Affirmative.
2. What order as to costs ? As per final order.
3. What order and decree ? Suit is partly
decreed.
REASONS
AS TO POINTS NO.1 AND 2 :
5. Plaintiff no.1 Manohar has deposed in his evidence affidavit
(Exh.6) that the plaintiffs alongwith Anil Manohar Dangle were holding
SIA0005459/1715 Shares of Siemens Company and Anil died on
14/10/2019. He also stated about search of original share certificate
and correspondence with the defendant for duplicate share certificate.
Death certificate of Anil is at Exh.8. Similarly, copies of the police
papers are also placed on record. Letters dated 26/11/2018,
-- 3 of 5 --
S.C.Suit No. 1463/2020. 4 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.14).
14/11/2019 and 27/11/2019 are marked as Exh.9, 10 and 11
respectively. Oral evidence coupled with documents on record proves
that the plaintiffs could not get original share certificates and the
defendant wants order of the Court. Considering all attending
circumstances and the fact that Anil Dangle died leaving behind the
plaintiffs, the suit can be decreed. In the result, I record my finding as
to point No.1 in the affirmative. Considering nature of the suit, parties
can be allowed to bear their own costs. Hence, I pass the following
order :
ORDER
1. S. C. Suit No. 1463/2020 is partly decreed.
2. The defendant is directed to cancel the original share
certificate and issue duplicate share certificate in respect of
shares SIA0005459/1715 (SIEMENS) in favour of the
plaintiffs within three months from the date of this order.
3. Parties shall bear their own costs.
4. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(R.R.BHAGWAT)
Judge,
City Civil Court,
(Court Room No.66)
Date : 24/04/2023. Mumbai.
1. Dictated online on : 24/04/2023.
2. Signed on : 24/04/2023.
3. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
-- 4 of 5 --
S.C.Suit No. 1463/2020. 5 Ex-parte Judgment (Exh.14).
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
24/04/2023. 5.44 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri R.R.Bhagwat.
(Court Room No.66).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 24/04/2023.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 24/04/2023.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 24/04/2023.
-- 5 of 5 --