Full Order Text
Final Order 1 · 09 Oct 2019 · CNR MHCC010056712018
Order Details: Notice of Motion Pdf Text: Adv. Sushma Keny for plaintiff present. Adv. Nilu Mishra for defendant nos. 1 and 2 present. Adv. Prachi Mhatre for defendant no. 3 present. Heard argument of Ld. Advocate for plaintiff and defendant nos. 1 to 3 on Notice of Motion No. 1725/2018. Order below Notice of Motion No. 1725/2018 Heard. This Notice of Motion is tendered for setting aside and recalling order dated 20.01.2018 dismissing the S. C. Suit (Stamp) No. 11027/17 for not removing the office objection. The Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff time and again visited the office but was not apprised about the objection as the record was not traceable with the department. Therefore the plaintiff could not remove the office objection. The Ld. counsel for the defendants submitted that the reasons given by the plaintiff is not sufficient reason. The delay of 77 days is not explained by the plaintiff On perusal of the record it appears that the matter was listed before the court on 13.10.2017 on the precepie of the plaintiff and on that day it was directed to plaintiff advocate to remove the office objection. Further on 22.11.2017 also the plaintiff was directed to remove the office objection. On 8.12.2017 as plaintiff failed to remove office objection, the matter was placed for dismissal and ultimately on 20.1.2018 suit came to be dismissed. The contention of the plaintiff is not acceptable that the matter was not traceable with the department when the advocate for the plaintiff had been to remove the office objection. But the said contention of the plaintiff is contrary to the record, as on 22.11.2017, 8.12.2017 and 20.1.2018 neither plaintiff nor his counsel remained before the Court. Be that as it may, the suit was dismissed on technical count as plaintiff failed to remove the office objection. The substantial rights of the parties are involved and there should not be hyper technical and pedantic approach in dealing with such type of motion. Hence, the notice of motion needs consideration. Hence it is expedient to pass following order ORDER 1. Notice of Motion No 1725/2018 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to cost of Rs. 2,000/- each to be paid to the defendant nos. 1 and 3 within a period of four weeks from today. 2. Payment of cost is subject precedent. 3. On payment of the cost within stipulated time, suit be restored to its original stamp number and plaintiff to remove the office objection immediately within 10 days from the date of restoration. 4. Notice of Motion is disposed of. _______________________________________ Adjourned for compliance to 4.12.2019. -- 1 of 1 --
