NOTICE OF MOTION
Mr. Manohar Shankar Sawant +1 moreVsAtul Shankar Sawant +3 more
CNR MHCC0100336920189-COURT 09 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
CASE DISPOSED
Contested--ALLOWED
Decision Date: 19th September 2019
TrustJury record updated 10 Sept 2026
Case Overview
- Registration Number
- 101033/2018
- Registration Date
- 09 Mar 2018
Advocates
1For Petitioner
For Respondent
Not available
Parties
6Acts & Sections
1Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act · Sec 9
Case History / Proceedings
Case History
Date: 16-03-2018
Business: Matter adj. for NM Reply and Written Statement to 04.07.2018.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 04-07-2018
Date: 04-07-2018
Business: Adjd. to 19/9/2018 for NM Hearing.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2018
Date: 19-09-2018
Business: Matter adj. for NM Hearing to 13.11.2018.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 13-11-2018
Date: 13-11-2018
Business: atter adj. for NM Hearing and Hearing on Exh.4 to 19.03.2019
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2019
Date: 19-03-2019
Business: Matter adj. for Hearing on Exh.4 to 23.07.2019.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2019
Date: 23-07-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. S. A. Shaikh for Plaintiff present
Advocate Mr. Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present
Advocate Mr. Mirde for Defendant no.7 present
Heard Plaintiffs advocate who has submitted that Plaintiffs and Defendant no.1, 2 and 4 to 7 have their share in suit property and Plaintiffs have claimed their share in the suit property. On perusal of prayer clause it is pointed out that in prayer clause (a) Plaintiffs have sought declaration about certain amount as their share in suit property and in prayer clause (b) they have claimed partition of suit property. Court has raised query as to how both those prayers can be made, Plaintiffs advocate submitted that he will take steps to delete prayer clause (a) from the plaint. Plaintiffs advocate referred the order passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate in a proceeding bearing CC no.11/DVN/2011 and he has pointed out that said proceeding was initiated by deceased mother of Plaintiffs. Lastly, it was argued that Plaintiffs have raised their objection before Co-operative housing society for not transfering suit premises in the name of Defendant no.1 and according to Plaintiffs advocate court receiver is necessary to be appointed for giving the suit premises on leave and license, for collecting the rent of suit premises and for distributing it between the legal heirs of deceased mother. Plaintiffs also argued that injunction is necessary to be granted restraining Defendant nos.1 and 3 from creating third party interest in suit premises.
Advocate Mr. Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 argued that ration card sought by Defendant nos.1 and 3 under application Exh.4 was handed over to Plaintiff\''s mother as per the order passed by Leraned Metropolitan Magistrate in Domestic Violence Act case. It is argued that said ration card is necessary to be produced before the authorities of educational institute of daughters of Defendant nos.1 and 3. Advocate Mr. Redekar strongly argued that suit premises is the tenanted premises given by MHADA to the father of Plaintiffs and later on it was transferred in the name of mother of Plaintiffs. According to advocate Mr. Redekar the suit for partition in respect of tenanted premises can not be filed hence Plaintiffs are not entitled to any relief sought in NM. It is pointed out that as per the order passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Defendant no.3 is possessing suit premises and she can not be dispossessed by appointing Court Receiver and by giving suit premises on leave and license basis to third parties, hence NM is necessary to be dismissed. It is argued that Defendant no.3 is the wife of Defendant no.1 hence, Plaintiffs should not have impleded her in partition suit as legal heir of deceased mother and therefore Plaintiffs claim is not maintainable for misjoinder of the parties.
Later on at 4.00 p.m. Advocate Mr. A. I. Mirde for Defendant no.7 appeared and argued that he is supporting Plaintiffs case.
Case is adjourned to 02/08/2019 for Order on NM no.1033/18.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 02-08-2019
Date: 02-08-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. S. A. Shaikh for Plaintiff present
Court is busy in dictating order on NM in suit no.7488/83 and order on Chamber Summons on suit no.4416/08, hence case is adjourned to 20/08/2019.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 20-08-2019
Date: 20-08-2019
Business: Advocate Shaikh for Plaintiff present
Advocate Mr. Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present
Court is busy in dictating order on NM in suit no.4108/10 as well as court has to hear urgent matters, hence case is adjourned to 30/08/2019 for NM order.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2019
Date: 30-08-2019
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
Advocate Vaishali Kulkarni for Defendant no.1 and 3 present
Court is busy in dictating judgment in suit no.6771/04, hence case is adjourned to 18/09/2019 for NM order.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2019
Date: 18-09-2019
Business: Plaintiff no.1 present.
Advocate Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present
Court is busy in hearing and dictating order on Chamber Summons in suit no.4813/08, hence case is adjourned to 19/09/2019 for NM order.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2019
Date: 19-09-2019
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
None present for Defendant nos.2 and 4 to 7.
Advocate Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present
F.R.S.R. following order has passed-
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.1033 of 18 is partly allowed.
2. Prayer clause (b) from the Notice of Motion stands dismissed and prayer clause (a) from the Notice of Motion is made absolute.
Suit to proceed for argument of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3.
Advocate for Defendant nos.1 and 3 has not pressed Exh.4 hence its stands disposed off as filed.
Case is adjourned to 25/11/2019 for arguments of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 19-09-2019Additional Case Details
Additional Case Details
Filing Number: 103775/2018 Filing Date: 09-03-2018 First Hearing Date: 16th March 2018 Decision Date: 19th September 2019 Court Number And Judge: 9-COURT 09 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
Orders
2Final Order 119 Sept 2019
19 Sept 2019
Order Details: Other Pdf Text: None present for Plaintiff. None present for Defendant nos.2 and 4 to 7. Advocate Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present F.R.S.R. following order has passed- ORDER 1. Notice of Motion No.1033 of 18 is partly allowed. 2. Prayer clause (b) from the Notice of Motion stands dismissed and prayer clause (a) from the Notice of Motion is made absolute. Suit to proceed for argument of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3. Advocate for Defendant nos.1 and 3 has not pressed Exh.4 hence its stands disposed off as filed. Case is adjourned to 25/11/2019 for arguments of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3. -- 1 of 1 --
Order 119 Sept 2019
19 Sept 2019
Order Details: Other Pdf Text: None present for Plaintiff. None present for Defendant nos.2 and 4 to 7. Advocate Redekar for Defendant no.1 and 3 present F.R.S.R. following order has passed- ORDER 1. Notice of Motion No.1033 of 18 is partly allowed. 2. Prayer clause (b) from the Notice of Motion stands dismissed and prayer clause (a) from the Notice of Motion is made absolute. Suit to proceed for argument of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3. Advocate for Defendant nos.1 and 3 has not pressed Exh.4 hence its stands disposed off as filed. Case is adjourned to 25/11/2019 for arguments of Defendant no.7 about the maintainability of counter claim filed by Defendant no.7 against Defendant no.1 and 3. -- 1 of 1 --
TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.
