Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: Order on Notice of Motion
No. 1577 of 2018
MHCC010048962018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR
GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1577 of 2018.
IN
S. C. SUIT NO.1853 of 2019.
Champshi S/o. Doongershi Heffa. ...Applicant/
Plaintiff.
In the matter of :-
Champshi S/o. Doongershi Heffa. ..Plaintiff
V/s.
Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited. ..Defendant.
Appearances :-
Adv. Vijay Ghedia i/b Rakesh Sawant for plaintiff.
Adv. Swapnil P. Kamble i/b Rita Joshi for defendant.
Coram : Shri.U. C. Deshmukh.
C.R. No.: 59.
Date : 26/06/2023
ORAL ORDER
This Notice of Motion is moved by the Plaintiff to direct the
defendant to pay and deposit an amount of Rs.96,34,700/- and to stay
implemention of order dated 30.11.2012.
-- 1 of 4 --
Order on Notice of Motion
No. 1577 of 2018
2. It is contention of the plaintiff that he was an employee of the
defendant. The defendant has dismissed the plaintiff from service vide
impugned order dated 30.11.2012 alleging that the plaintiff has acted
invoilation of rules of the defendant. The plaintiff was already suspended
on 24.09.2008 on false and fabricated charges. Whole process for dismissal
of the defendant is arbitratory and completed without following due
process of law. Considering the date of suspension of plaintiff, the
defendant ought to have pay an amount of Rs.96,34,700/-. Hence, he
instituted suit which is pending before the Court. Vide this Notice of
Motion the plaintiff has sought similar relief which are claimed in the suit.
3. The defendant has filed its reply. It is its contention that as
per rule of the superannuation of the employee and considering the age of
the plaintiff, he is not liable to reinstated in the services even for the
temporary period as he has attained the age of 65 years. He also
submitted that the plaintiff has no case to made out at the time of hearing
of the suit on merit. Hence, filed this Notice of Motion for claiming final
relief which cannot be granted. Hence, prayed to dismiss the Notice of
Motion.
4. Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff fairly admits that the plaintiff
has attained the age of 65 years and as per rules the retirement age of the
employee i.e. defendant is 58 year. Considering submission of both sides
and facts that the plaintiff has attained the age of 65 years, he cannot be
reinstated in service in any circumstances. Therefore, the relief sought by
the plaitniff vide prayer clause (a) is not maintainable in the eyes of law
-- 2 of 4 --
Order on Notice of Motion
No. 1577 of 2018
Moreover, it is case of the plaintiff that he is dismissed from the services on
30.11.2012. Hence, the question of implementation of said order does not
arise. Hence, consequently there is no order which can be stayed. The
second relief sought by the plaintiff is recovery of an amount of Rs.
96,53,700/- which is suit amount. The plaintiff has claimed the suit
amount by way of interim relief. There is substance in submission of the
Ld. Advocate for the defendant that grant of interim relief prayed vide
clause (3) of the Notice of Motion, will an amount to grant of final relief
which is not permissible in the eyes of law. On these grounds, the Notice
of Motion is not maintainable. Hence, Notice of Motions deserves to be
rejected. Therefore, following order is passed :
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 1577 of 2018 is rejected.
2. Notice of Motion No. 1577 of 2018 is disposed off
accordingly.
(U.C.Deshmukh)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court
Date.:26.06.2023 Greater Bombay (CR 59)
Declared on : 26.06.2023
Dictated on : 26.06.2023
Transcribed on : 12.07.2023
Checked on : 12.07.2023
Signed on :
-- 3 of 4 --
Order on Notice of Motion
No. 1577 of 2018
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
07.07.2023 at 06.05 p.m. Mrs. P.R.Wagh
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court
Room No.)
HHJ SHRI.U.C.Deshmukh,(C.R.No.59)
Judge.,City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date of pronouncement of /Order 23.06.2023
Order signed by P.O. on 07.07.2023
order uploaded on 07.07.2023
-- 4 of 4 --