Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1550 OF 2019
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO.9433 OF 2000
JSW Steel Limited … Plaintiff
V/s.
Punjab & Sind Bank & Anr. … Defendants
Appearances:
Ld. Adv Mahesh Bangla for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. D. Raghani for defendant no.1.
Ld. Adv. Jai vakil for defendant no.2.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI MILIND V. KURTADIKAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATED : 10th JULY, 2019
ORDER
Plaintiff has taken out this notice of motion for taking out
the suit from dismissal caption.
2. It is argued on behalf of plaintiff that on 17.09.2018 the
suit was listed for leading evidence by plaintiff. On that day the Ld.
Counsel for plaintiff was totally busy in Arbitration proceedings.
Therefore, plaintiff could not file evidence affidavit. The delay is not
intentional one. Plaintiff has wrongly taken out chamber summons
which was dismissed. Few days were spend for it. Plaintiff is ever
ready to proceed with the suit. His valuable rights and interest are
MHCC01-004122-2019
-- 1 of 3 --
NM 1550/2019 .. 2 .. Suit No.9433/2000
involved. Accordingly plaintiff prayed for removing the suit from
dismissal caption.
3. The defendants have resisted this application. It is their
submission that ample opportunity was given to plaintiff to lead
evidence. However, plaintiff has neglected and avoided to file evidence
affidavit. In order to further delay the matter plaintiff has taken out
chamber summons. As plaintiff is not willing to proceed with the suit
this notice of motion may be dismissed.
4. As per roznama on 16.01.2018 issues were framed and
since 09.04.2018 matter is listed for leading evidence. Now it is the
contention of plaintiff that on 17.09.2018 Ld. Counsel was busy in
Arbitration proceedings and therefore plaintiff could not file evidence
affidavit. In absence of any contrary submission I have no reason to
disbelieve this submission. If really plaintiff's advocate was busy in
another proceedings then the absence here is not deliberate or
intentional. Moreover plaintiff is ready to lead evidence then there
should not be any reason for this Court to deny said opportunity. As far
as possible matter must be decided on merit by giving full and fair
opportunity to the parties. The Court should not be too technical to
deprive the parties from substantial justice. At the most certain cost can
be imposed. Accordingly, the order.
O R D E R
1. NM No.1550/19 in SU 9433/00 is hereby allowed.
2. The suit is taken out from dismissal caption on plaintiff
paying cost of Rs.2000/ each to both the defendant to be
paid on or before next date.
-- 2 of 3 --
NM 1550/2019 .. 3 .. Suit No.9433/2000
3. On payment of cost suit be listed to regular stage of
compliance.
(Milind V. Kurtadikar)
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 10/07/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 10.07.2019
Transcribed on : 11.07.2019
Signed on : 15.07.2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
16.07.2019 01.10 p.m. Sanjay B. Kaskar
(StopGap Stenographer)
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri M.V. Kurtadikar
(CR No.20)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgement/Order.
10.07.2019.
Judgement/order signed by P.O on 15.07.2019.
Judgement/order uploaded on 16.07.2019.
-- 3 of 3 --