Skip to main content
TRANSFER APPL

Ajaay Shyam Jajodia in Suit No.245 of 18 in Dindoshi CourtVsThe State of Maharashtra +1 more

CNR MHCC01004273201919-COURT 19 PRINCIPAL JUDGE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
CASE DISPOSED
Contested--ORDER
Decision Date: 06th June 2019

TrustJury record updated 19 Sept 2026

Case Overview

Registration Number
100106/2019
Registration Date
16 Apr 2019

Advocates

1

For Petitioner

For Respondent

    Not available

    Parties

    3

    Acts & Sections

    1
    Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act · Sec 24

    Case History / Proceedings

    Case History
    Date: 20-04-2019
    Business: CORAM HIS HONOUR 2nd ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE,  SHRI S. A. QUAZI.
    Applicant in person present.
    Exh. 2 Applicant files affidavit of service.
    Adv. K. D. Shukla for respondent no. 2 present.
    Exh. 3 He files Vakalatnama.
    Adjd to 02.05.2019 for reply.
    Next Purpose: REPLY
    Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2019
    
    Date: 02-05-2019
    Business: Applicant in person present.
    Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent No.1 present and files citations.
    Adv. K.D. Shukla for respondent No.2 present.
    Exh.4Reply of respondent No.2.
    Kept back.
    Later on.
    Applicant in person present.
    Adv. K.D. Shukla for respondent No.2 present.
    Adjd. to 04/06/2019 for hearing.
    Next Purpose: HEARING
    Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2019
    
    Date: 04-06-2019
    Business: Applicant in person present.
    Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent No.1 present.
    Adv. K.D. Shukla for respondent No.2 present.
    Heard both sides.
    Adjd. to 06/06/2019 for order.
    Next Purpose: ORDER
    Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2019
    
    Date: 06-06-2019
    Business: Applicant in person present.
    Adv. Dhanashree Chalke for respondent No.2 present.
    Order below Exh.1.
    Read Application. Read say at (Exh.4) of respondent No.2. Heard both the sides.
    It appears that Execution Application No.9/2019 arising out of Summary suit No.245/2018 filed by applicant/decree holder is pending in C.R.No.5 of Dindoshi Court. The applicant has given the various grounds and instances for transferring the said Execution Proceedings to some other Court whereas respondent No.2 resisted the application by filing his say (Exh.4).
    At the very outset, the applicant/decree holder appearing in person submitted that the Presiding Officer of C.R.No.5 has already been transferred and therefore the present application has lost its importance. However, the applicant urged that the successor of earlier Presiding Officer be directed to expedite the hearing of the Execution Application No.9/2019 in the interest of justice and u/s 151 of Civil Procedure Code.
    The Learned Counsel appearing for respondents, on the other hand, submitted that no such direction of expeditious hearing can be given in as much as this Court is not sitting as an Appellate Court.
    On going through the record it is seen that Summary Suit No.245/2018 came to be decided ex parte vide judgment dated 20/12/2018. Pursuant to the passing of judgment and decree, the applicant/decree holder took out Execution Application No.9/2019. For some or the other reasons, as mentioned in the application, the Execution Proceeding could not make much progress and therefore, the applicant was compelled to file the present application.
    The present application is rendered infructuous in as much as the Presiding Officer against whom the allegations are made in the application has already been transferred. Now the only question which needs to be answered is whether direction of expeditious hearing of the said Execution Proceeding can be given to the Presiding Officer who has succeeded the earlier Presiding Officer.
    Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code does not confer any powers, but only indicates that there is a power to make such orders as may be necessary for achieving the ends of justice, and also to prevent an abuse of the process of the Court. The Court is not powerless to grant relief when the ends of justice and equity so demand, because the powers vested in the Court are of a wide scope and ambit.
    In the instant case admittedly the ex parte money decree came to passed on 20/12/2018. Immediately the Execution Application No.9/2019 came to be moved on 16/01/2019. It further appears that the respondent No.2 has already taken out a Notice of Motion for the purpose of setting aside the ex parte decree passed against him.
    In view of above, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the said Execution Proceeding is expedited. Rather it would sub-serve the ends of the justice.
    In view of above, I pass the following order
    O R D E R
    Application stands disposed of as rendered infructuous.
    However, Learned Judge of C.R.No.5 (Dindoshi Court) is requested to expedite the hearing of Execution Application No.9/2019.
    C.R.No.5 be informed accordingly.
    Nature Of Disposal: ORDER
    Disposal Date: 06-06-2019

    Additional Case Details

    Additional Case Details
    Filing Number: 104649/2019
    Filing Date: 16-04-2019
    First Hearing Date: 20th April 2019
    Decision Date: 06th June 2019
    Court Number And Judge: 19-COURT 19 PRINCIPAL JUDGE CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS COURT

    Orders

    1
    Final Order 1Full order available
    06 Jun 2019

    Order Details: Other Pdf Text: 06/06/2019 CORAM : HIS HONOUR THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE SHRI. V.G.BISHT T.A. 106/19 Applicant in person present. Adv. Dhanashree Chalke for respondent No.2 present. Order below Exh.1. Read Application. Read say at (Exh.4) of respondent No.2. Heard both the sides. It appears that Execution Application No.9/2019 arising out of Summary suit No.245/2018 filed by applicant/decree holder is pending in C.R.No.5 of Dindoshi Court. The applicant has given the various grounds and instances for transferring the said…

    Read Full Order

    TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.