Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: .1. CH/S No. 674/2018 in
L.C. Suit No.720/2018
MHCC010045972018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 674 OF 2018
IN
L.C. SUIT NO. 720 OF 2018.
Mohd. Salim Ebrahim Khatri. …........................... …... Plaintiff.
V/s.
Municipal Corporation Greater Mumbai…………. …... Defendant.
CORAM : Shri. A.G. Santani.
(Court Room No.11).
DATED : 21st February, 2022.
APPEARANCES :
Shri. Virendra T. Dubey, the Ld. Advocate for Plaintiff.
Adv. Sunil C. Khandagale, the Ld. Advocate for Defendant/MCGM.
*****
01. The plaintiff has taken out this Chamber Summons, U/O. VI
Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, for incorporation of the fact
that notice dtd. 26.03.2018, issued by the defendant, is bad in law. By
filing this Chamber Summons, he came with a specific case that in view
of the alleged inspection report and demolition report dtd. 15.02.2018,
deliberately, the defendant held that the plaintiff reconstructed the suit
premises and therefore, issued the notice dtd. 26.03.2018. It was served
upon his watchman on 27.03.2018 and the plaintiff replied the same on
28.03.2018. However, the defendant did not consider his reply and the
documents. As such, it is bad in law. Accordingly, he wished to bring the
said facts on the record with prayer for declaration against the said
notice to the effect. The defendant objected this Chamber Summons on
the ground that the plaintiff can’t ask for the relief of injunction against
-- 1 of 4 --
.2. CH/S No. 674/2018 in
L.C. Suit No.720/2018
the said notice as per the City Civil Court Rules.
02. Considering the record, the points for determination, along-
with my findings and the reasons therefor, are as under :
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
(i). Whether the proposed amendment is
necessary for deciding the real question
in controversy between the parties ?.... .....Yes
(ii). What Order ? .............…....................... …. As per final Order.
REASONS FOR FINDINGS
AS TO POINT NOS. 1:
03. By filing the Chamber Summons, the plaintiff's only anxiety
is to bring on record that arbitrarily, the defendant issued the suit notice
on 26.03.2018. Further, while doing so, he didn’t consider his reply and
the other documents, filed in response thereto. Consequently, the notice
is nullity and the same is required to be declared accordingly. He further
submitted that the said notice came to be issued at the behest of some
local politicians, who are not in cordial terms with the plaintiff. Be that
as it may, the fact remained that the proposed amendment is formal in
nature and it would be for the plaintiff to prove his contentions on trial.
In this circumstances, I am of the view that it needs to be allowed.
Hence, I answered point No.1 in the affirmative and in answer to point
No. 2, I pass the following Order :
-: O R D E R :-
(i). The Chamber Summons No. 674 of 2018 is made
absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) only.
(ii). The plaintiff is directed to carry out the proposed
amendment in the body of the plaint, positively
within two weeks from the passing of this Order.
(iii). Costs to follow the event.
-- 2 of 4 --
.3. CH/S No. 674/2018 in
L.C. Suit No.720/2018
(iv). The Chamber Summons No.674/2018, accordingly,
stands disposed off.
Sd/-
{A.G. Santani}
Mumbai. Ad-hoc Judge,
Dated : 21.02.2022 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 21.02.2022
Transcribed on : 22.02.2022
Signed on : 24.02.2022
-- 3 of 4 --
.4. CH/S No. 674/2018 in
L.C. Suit No.720/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT /ORDER”
On 25.02.2022 at 05.30 a.m. Mrs. S.R.Mejari
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) H.H.J. A.G. Santani
C.R. No.11
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
21.02.2022
Judgment /Order signed by P.O. on 24.02.2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on 25.02.2022
-- 4 of 4 --