Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM No.1493-19 1
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1493 OF 2019
(CNR NO. MHCC01-003951-2019)
IN
SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO.372 OF 2018
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO. 531 OF 2014
Manappuram General Finance And )
Leasing Ltd. )
A company registered under Companies )
Act 1956, having registered address at )
Manappuram House, Valapad, Thrissure- )
629567 and branch office at Building No.)
1, 2 & 3 First floor, Ramchandra Nivas, )
Char Rasta, Manpada Road, Dombivili )
(East), District- Thane. ) … Plaintiff
Versus
Saral Chem Industries Pvt. Ltd. )
94, Kazi Sayad Street, Gangavihar Ground)
Floor, Mumbai- 400 003. ) … Defendant
Appearance :-
Shri. Dhiraj Rathod, Advocate for plaintiff.
Shri. Sharma, Advocate for defendant.
CORAM :- HIS HONOUR JUDGE
S.C.PATHARE.
(C.R.NO.60)
DATE :- 02.03.2020.
ORAL ORDER
The Defendant has taken out this Notice of
Motion for condonation of delay of 100 days in filing reply
to the summons for judgment.
-- 1 of 4 --
NM No.1493-19 2
2. It is contended that plaintiff took out summons for
judgment dated 14/12/2018 along with affidavit, which came to
be served by RPAD on defendant on 19/12/2018.
3. Initially defendant as Director was appearing party
in person. Plaintiff did not supply ledger account to defendant
till 14/12/2018. Thereafter defendant engaged lawyer.
According to defendant he was not knowing the law that reply
to summons for judgment has to be filed within 10 days from
the service.
4. The opposite side submitted say and strongly
opposed this Notice of Motion. According to plaintiff ignorance
of law is no excuse. Further, defendant took various
adjournments. After service of summons for judgment defendant
did not file his reply in time. On all such grounds Notice of
Motion is resisted by plaintiff.
5. Defendant filed rejoinder affidavit alongwith
certified copy of the Board of Resolution dated 1/12/2015.
6. I have heard arguments advanced by both the Ld
counsels.
7. Perusal of record it shows that suit is for recovery
of Rs.3,55,923/-. Admittedly, ledger account copy was supplied
on 14/12/2018 despite the fact that suit is pending since 2014,
this aspect goes in favour of defendant to some extent.
8. So far as delay is concerned record shows that
defendant caused delay in the suit. Considering the nature of
the dispute, it appears necessary to condone delay subject to
-- 2 of 4 --
NM No.1493-19 3
reasonable cost to the plaintiff.
9. The dominant purpose of allowing such application
is to follow principles of natural justice.
10. Considering peculiar facts, circumstances etc. of the
matter I proceed to pass the following order in the interest of
justice.
ORDER
1. The Notice of Motion No. 1493 of 2019 is hereby
allowed.
2. Defendant shall pay cost Rs.10,000/- to the
plaintiff today or till next date for causing delay in
the suit.
3. Accordingly, Notice of Motion stands disposed
off.
(S. C. Pathare)
Ad-hoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay
Date :- 02.03.2020. (C.R.No.60)
Dictated on : 02.03.2020
Checked & Signed on : 02.03.2020
-- 3 of 4 --
NM No.1493-19 4
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE TIME STENOGRAPHER NAME
05.03.2020 3.30 pm S.A. Shekade
Name of the Judge H.H.J. S.C. Pathare
Ad-hoc Judge (Court Room No.60)
Date of pronouncement of Order 02.03.2020
Order signed by P.O. on 02.03.2020
Order uploaded on 05.03.2020
-- 4 of 4 --