Final Order 1

Order Details: Other
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
Misc. Application No.86 of 2019
Mr. Rajendra Girija Prasad Shukla ..Applicant.
V/s.
Smt. Kantidevi Girija Prasad Shukla & Anr. ... Respondents.
Coram : H.H.THE SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI V.G. BISHT
Dated : 24th June,2019
(C.R.No.19)
Advocate Mr. Rajendra Bhandari for the applicant.
Advocate Mr. M.A. Ansari for respondents.
O R A L O R D E R
Read application supported by affidavit. Read say (Exh.3) of
respondents.
2. It is seen from the contents of the application that applicant
has filed S.C. Suit No.114/2019 to alter and amend the decree passed by
this Court on 26/10/2018 seeking modification as per family settlement
dated 24/07/2018 to have half share of plaintiff/applicant and defendant
No.2 in suit premises in respect of room No.501, 5th floor, Pancha Ratna
-- 1 of 4 --
2
Building, Kamathipura, Mumbai. This suit is pending in C.R.No.2. It is then
contended that defendant No.2 has also filed S.C.Suit No.408/2019 against
defendant No.1 and himself to pass a decree of partition thereby
demarcating 1/3rd share of plaintiff in room No.501, 5th floor, Pancha
Ratna Building, Kamathipura, Mumbai. This suit is pending in C.R.No.3
Therefore, both the suits are required to be heard by one Court. Hence the
application.
3. The respondents, on the other hand, have denied the
settlement deed and contended that the present application have been filed
only to delay the matter and therefore liable to be rejected. However, they
have not disputed the decree dated 26/10/2018.
4. Ms. Rita Bhandari, Learned Counsel for applicant and Mr.
Husain Ali Chandrani, Learned Counsel for respondents, have advanced
the submissions in consonance with the contents of application and their
say respectively.
5. There is no dispute about passing the decree dated
26/10/2018 in S.C. Suit No.545/2017. It appears that subject matter of
both the suit is also the same. On going through the copy of roznama dated
25/02/2019 it appears that the presiding Judge observed that the
defendant No.2 shall be at liberty to get both the suits clubbed together.
Although, it may not be a direction to get both the suits clubbed together
but the facts remain that the subject matter of both the suits is same, both
-- 2 of 4 --
3
parties in the said suits are seeking partition of their shares as claimed
therein and therefore, in such circumstances, it is desirable that both the
suits be tried by any one Court.
6. In view of above, in my considered opinion, application merits
consideration and deserves to be allowed. Hence the following order.
O R D E R
Transfer Application No.86/2019 is allowed.
S.C. Suit No.408/2019 be transferred from C.R.No.3 to
C.R.No.2 where S.C. Suit No.114/2019 is pending.
Both the Courts be informed accordingly.
24/06/2019 (V. G. BISHT)
Principal Judge,
Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 24/06/2019
Transcribed on : 24/06/2019
Signed by HHJ on : 24/06/2019
-- 3 of 4 --
4
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Typist : Mr. Deepak S. Vaidya.
Upload date and time: 24/06/2019 at 4.30 p.m.
Name of the Judge H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
Shri V.G. BISHT(C.R.No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 24th June,2019
Order signed by P.O. on 24th June,2019
Order uploaded on 24th June, 2019
-- 4 of 4 --