Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: MHCC010054502019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1961 OF 2019
IN
LONG CAUSE SUIT NO.1081 OF 2013
Santosh Pandurang Mane ... Plaintiff
V/s.
MCGM and Two others ...Defendants
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. S.G. SHAIKH
CITY CIVIL COURT
GR.MUMBAI ( C.R.NO.06)
DATE : 26/11/2021
Adv. Suraj Gupte I/b Sameer Tendulkar for the plaintiff.
Adv. Bhave for the defendant no.3
Adv. Ms. Deepali Patil for the defendant/BMC.
ORAL ORDER
1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by defendant no.3 to file
written statement.
2. The plaintiff has filed reply to the same and strongly
opposed the notice of motion.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 N/M No.1961/2019
3. Perused the Notice of motion and say. Heard the learned
Advocates for the parties at the length.
4. It is contended by the defendant no.3 that due to paucity of
time he was unable to file written statement. Therefore , delay was
caused for filing written statement.
5. The procedure as to limit for filing written statement and
consequences of not filing the same are given in Order 8 of Civil
Procedure Code. Order 8 Rule 10 of the C.P.C., has laid down a
procedure about passing of a decree in favour of the plaintiffs, if
defendants fail to file his written statement. This discretion is not
exercised by the court in favour of the plaintiff for the reason of failure
of defendants to file their written statement.
6. In this background, if the defendant no.3 is allowed to file
his written statement, it will not cause any prejudice to either plaintiff
or to the overall hearing of this suit. If the defendant No.3 is allowed to
file written statement and if the suit decreed in favour of the plaintiff, it
would be a decree on merit. On the other hand, if the defendants are
not allowed to file their written statement, it would result into a decree
which would be technically exparte decree. Therefore, this court is of
the opinion that evidence of the plaintiff has not commenced and
therefore, defendants should be allowed to file their written statement
in order to enable this court to decide the suit on merit.
7. There is one more reasonable important point that the
written statement is filed after the period of 90 days of the service of
summons/notice. The written statement along with this application is
-- 2 of 4 --
3 N/M No.1961/2019
being filed after the period of 90 days. However, this court is of the
opinion that for the stated reasons the defendants are to be allowed to
file their written statement. Filing of written statement by this
defendants beyond the prescribed period of time framed has not caused
any serious prejudice to the plaintiff. Hence, the order.
ORDER
1. The Notice of Motion No.1961/2019 is allowed.
2. Defendant No.3 is directed to file written statement on or
before next date.
3. The Notice of Motion No.1961/2019 is disposed off.
(Smt. S.G.Shaikh)
Date26/11/2021 Judge,City Civil Court,
Gr.Mumbai.
Dictated on : 26/11/2021
Typed on : 26/11/2021
Signed on :
-- 3 of 4 --
4 N/M No.1961/2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
26/11/2021 05.00 p.m. ( Mayuresh P. Tathe)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
room No.)
HHJ Smt. S. G. Shaikh (C.R.No.06)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
26/11/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
26/11/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 26/11/2021
-- 4 of 4 --