Full Order Text
Order 1 · 04 May 2018 · CNR MHCC010049782018
Order Details: Notice of Motion Pdf Text: NM No.1603/2018 ..1.. Suit No.41/2018 CNR No.MHCC010049782018 IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1603 OF 2018 IN SUIT NO.41 OF 2018 Mr. Pramod Deorao Mether .. Plaintiff Versus Synthetic & Art Silk Mills Research Association (SASMIRA) and Anr. .. Defendants Rajendra H. Satale, Learned advocate for plaintiff V.M. Parkar, Learned Advocate for defendant No.1 CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE SMT. ULKA L. JOSHI (COURT ROOM NO.31) DATE : 4th May, 2018 : ORDER : 1. Notice of motion is for condonation of delay and leave to file written statement. 2. Story put forth by defendant no.1 in short is that, Writ of summons is served on 23/01/2018. However due to involvement in other official and for want of approval defendant could not file written statement within stipulated period. Delay is not deliberate or intentional. He is having good case on merit. In such eventuality if participation is not allowed much injustice will cause to him. Hence, this notice of motion for condonation of delay and leave to file written statement. -- 1 of 3 -- NM No.1603/2018 ..2.. Suit No.41/2018 3. By filing reply plaintiff raised strong objection. To him, notice of motion is not maintainable. Grounds shown are not justifiable. Hence he prayed for dismissal of notice of motion. 4. Before entering into actual merit, let me quote that provision of Order 8 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code is procedural and directory in nature. Basic object of incorporation of Order 8 Rule 1 is to curb mischief played by unscrupulous litigants who cause delay in disposal of cases. Departure from time schedule is permissible in cases where circumstances are beyond the control of parties or in cases when it is required to prevent injustice to the other side. Reliance in that regard, can be placed on the law laid down in case of Sambhaji and Others Vs. Gangabai and others [(2008) 17 Supreme Court Cases 117] and in case of State of Goa & Ors. Vs. H.B.Singh & Co. [2012 (4) ALL MR 750]. By keeping well in mind this basic requirement let me turn towards factual aspects. 5. It is contention of defendant that he was busy in his official duties as well as could not get approval from his superiors and therefore written statement could not be filed within stipulated time. This circumstance cannot be said to be beyond control of party or exceptional circumstance. Hence, on that count defendant is not entitled for condonation of delay. 6. Pertinent to note that rules of procedure are made to advance the cause of justice. Equity and substantial cause of justice always demands opportunity. Hence with a view to decide real point in controversy once for all on merit and with a view to avoid multiplicity of lis delay is require to be condoned. However, considering the -- 2 of 3 -- NM No.1603/2018 ..3.. Suit No.41/2018 negligence at the hands of defendant cost is require to be imposed. Hence I pass following order: : ORDER : 1. Notice of Motion No.1603 of 2018 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause Nos (a) and (b) subject to cost of Rs2,000/ by defendant to plaintiff on or before next date. 2. After payment of cost permission is granted to defendant for filing his written statement. 3. Defendant is directed to file the written statement on next date and that too by payment of cost. (Pronounced in Open Court) (Smt. U. L. Joshi) Judge City Civil & Sessions Court, Date : 04/05/2018 Gr. Bombay Typed on : 04/05/2018 HHJ signed on : -- 3 of 3 --
