Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM No.91818
CNR No. MHCC010031322018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.918 OF 2018
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.4693 OF 2007
(HIGH COURT SUMMARY SUIT NO.742 OF 2007)
Life Insurance Corporation of India ...Plaintiff
V/s.
Seby A. Braganza ...Defendant
Appearances:
Ld. Adv C. K. Mhatre for the defendant.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. KALPANA S. HORE
COURT ROOM NO.14
DATED : 25th FEBRUARY, 2019.
ORDER
1. The defendant has taken out this notice of motion for condoning
delay in filing affidavit in reply for seeking leave to defend the suit and
he be permitted to file affidavit in reply for seeking leave to defend the
suit.
2. Defendant's contention is that summons was served upon
defendant. Thereafter, he made appearance through his Advocate. The
plaintiff has taken Chamber Summons no.1840 of 2016 for condonation
of delay of 13 months and 22 days in taking out summons for judgment
against the defendant. The said chamber summons was allowed on
16.06.2017 subject to cost of Rs.2,000/ being paid to the defendant.
3. Defendant's further contention is that on 31.01.2018, he made
inquiry with his earlier Advocate about the status of the matter. It was
-- 1 of 3 --
2 NM No.91818
informed by him about his inability to attend the matter further.
Hence, on 01.02.2018 he sought adjournment in person. Thereafter, he
engaged new Advocate and upon proper enquiry he came to know that
his earlier Advocate was served upon on his earlier Advocate on
30.10.2017. However, reply could not be filed within time due to lack
of communication from his earlier Advocate. His contention is that he
has good case to defend the suit filed by the plaintiff on merits so, he
may be allowed to condone delay of 112 days for filing affidavit in reply
for seeking leave to defend the suit.
4. The plaintiff has not filed reply to notice of motion.
5. I have heard Advocate for defendant.
6. Considering the reasons given by the defendant and due to lack
of communication of his earlier Advocate, there is delay of 112 days in
filing affidavit in reply for seeking leave to defend the suit. Hence, in
the interest of justice, delay is condoned and defendant is permitted to
file affidavit in reply for seeking leave to defend the suit within 15 days
from the date of order and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following
order :
O R D E R
1. Notice of Motion No.918 of 2018 is allowed.
2. Defendant is permitted to file affidavit in reply for seeking leave
to defend the suit within 15 days from the date of order.
3. Notice of Motion No.918 of 2018 stands disposed of accordingly.
( KALPANA S. HORE )
Judge,
Dated : 25/02/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 25/02/2019
Transcribed on : 25/02/2019
Signed on : 25/02/2019
-- 2 of 3 --
3 NM No.91818
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
27.02.2019 3.39 p.m. ARUN ANNAMALAI MUDALIYAR
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ Smt. K. S. HORE (CR 14)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
25.02.2019
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
25.02.2019
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
27.02.2019
-- 3 of 3 --