Order 3

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: ..1.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
MHCC010035882021
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.744 OF 2021
IN
S.C.SUIT NO. 1531 OF 2018
Smt. Saveetha Kumar Devendra ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Smt. Angamma Ramaswamy Devendra ...Defendants.
And
Mrs. Namrata Jaiprakash Tiwari & Ors. ...Obstructionist
Appearance:
Adv. R.A.Yadav for the Plaintiff.
Adv. Nitin Pagare for Obstructionist No.2
CORAM : SMT. A.K.MANDAVGADE
AD-HOC JUDGE, (C.R.NO.62)
DATE : 27.08.2026
ORAL ORDER
(Dictated in open Court)
The Chamber summons is filed by the plaintiff with prayer
that during pendency of the suit to allow the chamber summons as per
the schedule, to direct the obstructionist to quit, vacate and handover
peaceful possession to the plaintiff pursuant to the decree/order passed
by this court on 04/03/2020 in Notice of Motion No.1384/2019. The
-- 1 of 8 --
..2.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
obstructionist had purchased the suit premises from the defendant. This
fact is mentioned in bailiff report dated 26/03/2021. Obstructionist
No.1 and 2 are husband and wife and they have given the suit premises
on leave and license to obstructionist No.3. The plaintiff has prayed to
declare the said transaction and agreement for sale dated 02/08/2019
as illegal. Obstructionist No.1 had installed electric meter in the suit
premises in the month of June 2020 i.e. after passing of order dated
04/03/2020 which act also needs to be declared as illegal and to direct
the BEST and the obstructionist No.1 and 2 to remove the electric meter
from the suit premises. Obstructionist No.3 is the licensee in whose
favour leave and license agreement is executed by obstructionist No.2
on 25/06/2019 which should be declared as illegal and to direct all the
obstructionist to surrender the suit premises to the plaintiff in Execution
Application No.08/2021. Police aid may be provided for the same. In
the schedule names of obstructionist No.1 to 3 and their addresses are
mentioned.
2. As per supporting affidavit, the suit is filed on 17/04/2018
and notice of motion was taken in which vide order dated 04/03/2020
prayers (a) and (c) are made absolute by this court (the then Court
No.9). Four weeks time was granted to challenge the order, but that was
not availed by the defendants. Meanwhile Execution application
08/2021 was filed by the plaintiff in which order was passed by the
Registrar to appoint Sheriff to execute the order and restore possession
to the plaintiff. When the bailiff with the help of police tried to take
possession that time it was revealed that obstructionist No.1 to 3 have
illegally and without permission of the court have taken possession
from the defendants and purchased the property vide sale agreement
dated 25/06/2019 which is not registered document. Bailiff report
-- 2 of 8 --
..3.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
dated 26/03/2021 revealed that obstructionist No.1 and 2 have
purchased suit premises from the defendant during pendency of the suit
and have installed electric meter. They have also executed leave and
license agreement in favour of obstructionist No.3 on 25/06/2019. All
these transactions are illegal. Hence names of obstructionist may be
allowed to be added in chamber summons as obstructionist No.1 to 3
and other consequential reliefs may be granted.
3. As per reply filed by obstructionist, the plaintiff is not
decree holder, hence chamber summons is not tenable. The suit is not
filed for possession and the order which the plaintiff wants to execute is
interim order passed in notice of motion. As the suit is not filed for
possession the plaintiff cannot be put into possession in execution of
interim order. The plaintiff was not in possession of the suit premises on
the alleged date of dispossession i.e. 27/28-11-2018. Yet plaintiffs right,
title and interest has not been adjudicated. Order dated 04/03/2020 is
not binding upon the obstructionist. Obstructionist No.1 is a bonafide
purchaser/assignee of the right, title and interest of the defendant in
the suit premises for value and without notice of pending litigation.
Obstructionist No.1 is holding possession in his independent right being
owner/assignee of the suit property. His right over the suit property had
been perfected prior to the passing of the order dated 04/03/2020.
There was no prohibitory order in favour of the plaintiff or against the
defendant on the date of transfer/assignment of the suit premises in
favour of obstructionist No.1. Hence Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC is not
applicable.
4. It is further contention of the obstructionists that the
plaintiff has not paid proper court fees after amendment of the suit.
-- 3 of 8 --
..4.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
Hence order dated 04/03/2020 cannot be executed. The obstructionist
are not parties to the suit, hence the interim order dated 04/03/2020
cannot be executed against them. The order dated 04/03/2020 is
obtained by suppressing the fact of possession of the obstructionist.
Warrant of possession has not been issued against the obstructionist.
The order dated 04/03/2020 is challenged by the obstructionist before
Hon’ble High Court. Plaintiff does not reside in the suit premises
deliberately but has given her false address. After filing of the suit on
17/04/2018, the plaintiff taken out Notice of Motion No.2376/2018 for
interim injunction order. Vide order dated 26/06/2018 the court
rejected prayer for ad-interim relief. Prior to passing of order dated
04/03/2020, Notice of Motion No.4507/2018 for the same relief as
prayed in Notice of Motion No.1384/2019 was taken out and that was
pending. Notice of Motion No.2376/2018 was disposed of on
19/12/2018. Execution Application is not filed against the
obstructionist. Defendant No.1 has executed agreement for sale on
02/08/2019 with obstructionist No.1 in respect of suit premises for
total consideration of Rs.18,00,000/-. After execution of said agreement
the obstructionist were put in vacant and peaceful possession of the suit
premises on 02/08/2019 and since then the obstructionist with their
family are occupying the possession continuously and without any
interruption. Documents like PAN card, ration card, Aadhar card, gas
connection, passport etc., of obstructionist No.1 show the address of
suit premises. The plaintiff was aware of the said assignment in favour
of obstructionist No.1 but remain silent and fraudulently obtained order
dated 04/03/2020. Obstructionist No.3 is not in possession of the suit
premises. The plaintiff has no right, title or interest in the suit premises.
They have denied all the allegations of the plaintiff and prayed for
rejection of the chamber summons.
-- 4 of 8 --
..5.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
5. As per rejoinder filed by the plaintiff she has prayed that
the chamber summons may be allowed and the obstructionist may be
directed to compensate the plaintiff for taking illegal possession of the
suit premises and to direct the obstructionist to hand over peaceful
possession to the plaintiff.
6. Heard learned advocate for the plaintiff and learned
advocate for the obstructionist. As per submission of learned advocate
for the plaintiff, the plaintiff is dispossessed from the suit premises.
There was obstruction to the bailiff on 26/03/2021. Hence chamber
summons is filed to join the obstructionist but not as defendant. On the
other hand, learned advocate for the obstructionist argued that
obstructionist is purchaser. Despite order dated 09/08/2023 passed in
Chamber Summons No.1017/2022, yet the plaintiff has not complied
with the order.
7. On perusal of chamber summons it becomes clear that the
plaintiff has prayed for the reliefs as mentioned above i.e. regarding
possession. The schedule contains names of the obstructionist and the
paragraph that "
pursuant to bailiff’s report dated 26/03/2021 it is
revealed to the plaintiff that obstructionist No.1 and 2 have purchased
the suit premises from defendant on 25/06/2019 as per sale agreement
notarized the agreement on 02/08/2019 in the name of the
obstructionist No.1 and obstructionist No.2 has executed his leave and
license agreement with obstructionist no.3 and electric meter installed
in the name of obstructionist No.1 by BEST at the suit premises on June
2020 after passing of the order dated 04/03/2020 therefore these
illegal acts done during pending suit and passing order in Notice of
-- 5 of 8 --
..6.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
Motion No.1384/2019." In affidavit it is mentioned that Execution
Application No.08/2021 may be allowed and obstructionists' name may
be allowed to be added in chamber summons as obstructionist No.1 to 3
and other consequential relief be allowed. Thus, from the supporting
affidavit it appears that the plaintiff wants to add name of the
obstructionist in chamber summons, but which chamber summons that
is not mentioned in the affidavit. The affidavit filed in support of
chamber summons does not mention that the plaintiff wants to amend
the plaint either as per the schedule or as per the prayers mentioned in
the chamber summons.
8. Learned advocate for the plaintiff pointed out that Hon’ble
High Court has passed order to expedite Chamber summons
No.744/2021. Hence arguments of both the parties were heard.
Thereafter also opportunity was granted to the plaintiff to explain
exactly what relief the plaintiff wants to seek by filing this Chamber
Summons No.744/2021. However the plaintiff has failed to explain
exactly what relief she wants by filing this chamber summons. As
discussed above the chamber summons nowhere speaks regarding relief
of amendment. On the other hand, it appears that the reliefs claimed by
the plaintiff, by way of this chamber summons are regarding
dispossession/eviction of the obstructionist. Admittedly by way of
chamber summons a person cannot be evicted. In such situation, I am of
the view that Chamber Summons No.744/2021 is liable to be rejected.
Hence, I pass following order:-
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No.744 of 2021 is dismissed.
2. No order as to cost.
-- 6 of 8 --
..7.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
3. Accordingly, Chamber Summons is disposed of.
(Smt. A.K.Mandavgade)
Ad-hoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Date : 27/08/2026 Gr. Mumbai.
Pronounced on : 27/08/2026
Directly dictated on comp : 27/08/2026
Typed on : 27/08/2026
Checked & Signed on : 28/08/2026
-- 7 of 8 --
..8.. Order in Ch/s.no.744/21 in S.C.Suit 1531/18
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
Mrs. Manisha S. Putta
(Stenographer Grade-I)
28.08.2026 11.45 AM
Name of the Judge (With C.R. No.) HHJ Smt. A.K.Mandavgade
(C.R.No. 62)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGEMENT
/ORDER
27.08.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on 28.08.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on 28.08.2026
-- 8 of 8 --