Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GR.BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.651 OF 2019
CNR NO.MHCCO10032792019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.4944 OF 2008
Neela Kishor Virani ..Plaintiff
V/s
1. Oriental Bank of Commerce
& others ..Defendants
Ld. advocate Modi for plaintiff
Ld. advocate Mahadik for defendant no.7
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI M.SALMAN AZMI
DATE: 04/09/2019
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard.
2. By this chamber summons, the plaintiff wish to
amend the plaint. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff
submitted that chamber summons of defendant no.1
was allowed and thereby the plaintiff was directed to
add defendant no.7 as party defendant. The plaintiff
wish to incorporate the subsequent events which
arose from the stand of defendant no.7 that he has
purchased the suit premises from defendant nos.2 to
5 by virtue of the sale deed. In view of that
development, the plaintiff wish to incorporate the
said facts on record.
-- 1 of 3 --
2
3. Defendant nos.1 to 6 are not present. Even they
have not filed say to the chamber summons. Ld.
Counsel for defendant no.7 is present. She submitted
that defendant no.7 does not wish to file reply but
opposed the chamber summons. In the alternate,
prayed for granting an opportunity for the
consequential amendment to the facts which the
plaintiff wants to incorporate in the pleadings.
4. On perusal of the record, it appears that defendant
no.7 was not party defendant. Defendant no.7
tendered chamber summons no.1719/2015 and
prayed for impleading him as a party defendant. By
virtue of the order dated 15/12/2018 by the
Predecessor of this Court, the chamber summons
no.1719/2015 was allowed and defendant no.7 was
added as a party defendant. It is the contention of
the plaintiff that transaction between defendant nos.
2 to 5 and defendant no.7 was during the pendency
of the suit, hence these facts were not in existence at
the time of institution of the suit. The very fact has
been brought to the notice after the chamber
summons was tendered by defendant no.7. The
transaction between defendant nos.2 to 5 and 7
appears to be subsequent event i.e. pending the suit.
The dispute between the parties should be decided in
a single compass of litigation. In order to avoid
multiplicity of the proceedings and further
complications and when defendant no.7 is added as
-- 2 of 3 --
3
party defendant, this chamber summons for
amendment needs consideration. Hence, it is
expedient to pass following order:
ORDER
1.CS 651/19 is made absolute in terms of prayer
clause (a).
2. Plaintiff to carry out the necessary amendment
within 14 days from today. The defendants are at
liberty to consequently amend the Written
statement, if any.
04/09/2019 M.SALMAN AZMI
CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR.MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 04/09/2019
Transcribed on: 19/09/2019
Signed on : 21/09/2019
'CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
21/09/19 at 4.00 pm.
MRS.T.C.KAMBLE
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI M.S.AZMI, CR NO.1
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
04/09/2019
Judgment and order signed by P.O. 21/09/2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 21/09/2019
-- 3 of 3 --