Date: 23-07-2019
Business: Adv. Nikita More for plaintiff present.
Adv. Bamne for defendant no. 1 present.
Registered NM no. 1730/19 tendered by the defendant no. 1. TOR.
Adjourned for reply to NM to 19.9.2019.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2019
Date: 19-09-2019
Business: Adv. Nikita More for plaintiff present.
Adv. Jani h/f Adv. Bamne for defendant present.
Reply filed by plaintiff to the NM.
The Ld. counsel for the defendant seeks time.
Adjourned for NM hearing to 7.11.2019.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 07-11-2019
Date: 07-11-2019
Business: Adv. S. G. Shirsat for plaintiff present.
Adv. Bamne for defendant no. 1 present.
Heard Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant no. 1 on Notice of Motion No. 1730/2019.
Order below Notice of Motion No. 1730/2019.
This is a Notice of Motion for seeking condonation of delay in filing written statement. Heard. The ld. counsel for the defendant no. 1 submitted that written statement was served upon to the defendant no. 1 in last week of August-2018. The defendant no. 1 appeared in the matter and requested court to adjourn the suit for filing written statement. The copy of the plaint was received from the plaintiff on 10.1.2019 and received by his advocate on 14.1.2019. Accordingly, instructed the advocate to file the written statement. The plaintiff opposed the present notice of motion and submitted that the defendant no. 1 was served with writ of summon in August 2018 and he failed to file the written statement within 30 days. There is delay of 120 days and the defendant no.1 has not made out sufficient cause. The Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff submitted that the ground given by the defendant no.1 that the copy of the plaint was sent in February 2019 is not maintainable as the copy of the plaint was supplied with the written statement.
Considered the rival submissions of the parties. The defendant no. 1 himself admitted service of writ of summons in August 2018. He appeared in the matter on 7.9.2018, but has not raised the issue that he has not received the copy of the plaint. Therefore, the said argument, at this stage, does not hold good. Be that as it may, the matter is at initial stage. Substantial rights of the parties are involved. The defendant no. 1 wish to prosecute the matter. No prejudice would be caused to the plaintiff if the written statement is taken on the record. Even otherwise there should not be pedantic and hyper technical approach in dealing with such type of motion. Hence, it is expedient to pass following order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 1730/2019 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to costs of Rs. 1,000/- to be paid to the plaintiff within a period of four weeks from today.
2. The payment of costs is subject precedent.
3. On payment of cost, written statement be taken on record.
4. Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 07-11-2019