Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: Chamber Summons 808-19 In S.C.Suit No. 3792- 2008
H.C.Suit No. 1323 of 2008.
1 Date 21.12.2019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.808 of 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 3792 of 2008
(H.C. SUIT NO. 1323 OF 2008)
(CNR NO.MHCC01 0040442019)
Smt. Charulata H. Lulla . .. Plaintiff
Versus
Hiroo T. Shahani & Ors. .. Defendants
Appearances :
Ld. Adv.S.K.Chaurasia for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv.Bal Patil for defendant.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
Judge.
C.R. No. : 7
Dated : 21.12.2019
ORDER
1. The defendants have filed instant Chamber Summons for
amendment of Written Statement as per schedule.
2. It is contended by the defendants that the plaintiff filed
instant suit for recovery of possession of suit premises i.e. Northern
Portion of Ground Floor premises. It is the contention of the
defendants that they are tenants of Southern portion of the suit
-- 1 of 5 --
Chamber Summons 808-19 In S.C.Suit No. 3792- 2008
H.C.Suit No. 1323 of 2008.
2 Date 21.12.2019
premises. The plaintiff failed to file any sanction plan in the
present suit. The defendants on 08.01.2019 received notice of
inspection from Municipal Corporation, whereby defendants came
to know that the plaintiff filed Writ Petition No. 3350 of 2018
against the Municipal Corporation. In the aforesaid Writ Petition,
the Hon’ble High Court directed the Municipal Corporation to take
action in respect of complaint filed by the plaintiff.
3. It is contended by the defendants that they were not made
party in the aforesaid proceeding. Therefore, on 08.02.2019, they
have filed application before Prothonotary & Senior Master of
Hon’ble Bombay High Court and obtained certified copy of the
Writ Petition. After receiving the copies of necessary record it
revealed to the defendants that the plaintiff alleged that the
defendants are illegally occupying Gound Floor portion belonging
to her. The plaintiff also filed sanctioned Building Plan of the suit
property. On perusal of the aforesaid Building Plan, it proves that
there is no division of Ground Floor as alleged by the plaintiff in
the present suit. If the above plan is consider, then the allegations
of the plaintiff in respect of division of Ground Floor into Northern
and Southern porition become infructuous. The plaintiff being
well aware of the above fact, deliberately withhold the sanction
plan at the time of present suit. Hence, it is contended by the
defendants that it is necessary to bring the above fact on record as
it goes to the root of matter. Hence, the defendants prayed for
allowing present Chamber Summons.
-- 2 of 5 --
Chamber Summons 808-19 In S.C.Suit No. 3792- 2008
H.C.Suit No. 1323 of 2008.
3 Date 21.12.2019
4. The Chamber Summons is opposed by the plaintiff by filing
say. It is alleged by the plaintiff that the present Chamber
Summons is time barred and the same is taken out to protract the
trial and to stall the proceedings. The evidence of plaintiff is
closed and the defendant no. 2 is under Crossexamination.
Hence, plaintiff prayed for dismissal of the Chamber Summons.
During course of argument, the advocate for plaintiff aruged that
instead of allowing the Chamber Summons, the defendants can file
the sanction plain on record and lead the appropriate evidence.
Hence, there is no need for amendment.
5. Heard both the sides. Perused Chamber Summons, reply and
pleadings of the parties. The plaintiff filed instant suit for
possession of Ground Floor premises which is alleged to be
occupied by the defendants as a traspasser. It is not in dispute that
the evidence of plaintiff is completed and defendant no. 2 is under
Crossexamination. It is well settled law that the amendment in
the Written Statement can be allowed at any stage of proceeding
provided the said amendment should go to the root of matter and
necessary to decide the dispute between the parties.
6. On perusal of the Order of Hon’ble High Court in Writ
Petition No. 3350 of 2018, it appears that the plaintiff herein filed
Sanction Plan in the said Writ Petition but did not file the same in
the present suit. In my view, looking to the controversy between
-- 3 of 5 --
Chamber Summons 808-19 In S.C.Suit No. 3792- 2008
H.C.Suit No. 1323 of 2008.
4 Date 21.12.2019
the parties, subsequent events needs to be incorporated by way of
pleadings by the defendants. The proposed amendment is
necessary to decide the dispute between the parties. Therefore, in
my view, the Chamber Summons needs to be allowed in the
interest of justice. Thus, I proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 808 of 2019 is made absolute in
terms of prayer clause (a).
2. Defendants to carryout amendment as per schedule within
14 days from the date of order.
3. No order as to the cost.
4. Chamber Summons No. 808 of 2019 is disposed off
accordingly.
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court
Dated : 21.12.2019 Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 21.12.2019
Transcribed on : 21.12.2019
Draft submitted on : 21.12.2019
Checked on : 21.12.2019
Signed on : 21.12.2019
-- 4 of 5 --
Chamber Summons 808-19 In S.C.Suit No. 3792- 2008
H.C.Suit No. 1323 of 2008.
5 Date 21.12.2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
21/12/2019 at 5.00 p.m. (Ms. V.V.Sawant)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
room no.)
Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.7)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ ORDER
21/12/2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
21/12/2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
21/12/2019
-- 5 of 5 --