Skip to main content
Court Order

Order 1

CNR MHCC01005471201918 Sept 2019
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Order 1 · 18 Sept 2019 · CNR MHCC010054712019

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 1973-19 in Suit No. 1780-09
CNR NO.MHCC0100019619
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1973 OF 2019
IN
L.C. SUIT NO. 1780 OF 2009
Kundapur Mahabal Nagraj M. Shet …....Plaintiff
V/s.
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Ors. ..... Defendants
Coram : Sanjay N. Yadav, Judge
(Court Room no. 05)
Date : 18th September, 2019
Appearance:
Ld. Adv. Mr. S.M. Khaire for the plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Pradeep Patil for defendant/MCGM.
ORDER
1. The plaintiff by this notice of motion seeks to produce certain
documents showing that the Electric Meters are installed from 1972 till
2018. He also had inspected the suit premises and had filed report by
Consultant Architect Shri. H.S. Hariani and submitted a report dated
30.05.2019. The documents are secured by making Right To
Information Application. The plaintiff seeks to incorporate the
pleadings in the plaint to that effect.
2. Heard Learned Advocate for the plaintiff and Learned Advocate
for the defendant corporation.
-- 1 of 3 --
2 NM 1973-19 in Suit No. 1780-09
Order 18, Rule 17A reads as under:
''Production of evidence not previously known or which could not
be produced despite due diligence.Where a party satisfies the Court
that, after the exercise of due diligence, any evidence was not within his
knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when that party
was leading his evidence, the Court may permit that party to produce
that evidence at a later stage on such terms as may appear to it to be
just.''
It was for the plaintiff to show the exercise of due diligence the
evidence was not within his knowledge or could not be produced at the
time of filing of suit. The suit is for evidence. The plaintiff had ample
opportunity to secure these documents. The documents are sought in
the year 2019. It cannot be said that the plaintiff was not within the
knowledge of the documents. The Notice of Motion, therefore, cannot
be entertained and deserves to be dismissed.
In the result, following order is passed.
ORDER
The Notice of Motion No. 1973/2019 is dismissed.
(Sanjay N. Yadav)
Judge,
Date : 18.09.2019 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 18.09.2019
Transcribed on : 21.09.2019.
Signed by HHJ on : 24.09.2019
-- 2 of 3 --
3 NM 1973-19 in Suit No. 1780-09
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 25.09.2019 at 11.05 a.m.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Mrs. K.S.Bhosale
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. Sanjay N. Yadav
C.R. no. 05
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
18.09.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
24.09.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
25.09.2019
-- 3 of 3 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.