Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL COURT AT GR.BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2075 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2690 OF 2014
CNR NO.MHCCO10057602019
Mrs.Kalyani Pradeep Kadam ..Plaintiff
V/s
Mr.Suresh Lahu Kamble and ors ..Defendants
Ld. advocate Redekar for the plaintiff
Ld. advocate Jafri for defendant nos.1 and 2
Ld. advocate Priyanka Gaonkar for defendant no.4
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI M.SALMAN AZMI
DATE: 15/07/2019
ORAL ORDER
1. This notice of motion is tendered by defendant nos.1
and 2 for condonation of delay in filing the written
statement.
2. Heard. Perused the notice of motion, reply and the
record.
3. Ld. Counsel for defendant nos.1 and 2 submitted that
writ of summons were never served upon the
defendant nos.1 and 2. The bailiff reports says that
defendant no.3 had received copy of writ of
summons on behalf of defendant nos.1 and 2 on
30/03/2015 and had not informed anything about it.
Defendant no.3 is neither the family member of
-- 1 of 3 --
2
defendant nos.1 and 2 nor defendant nos.1 and 2
had given any power and authority to him to receive
the summons on their behalf. The defendant nos.1
and 2 wish to contest the suit and therefore prayed
for condoning the delay and taking the written
statement on record.
4. The reply is filed on behalf of the plaintiff. The
plaintiff submitted that this notice of motion is
devoid of merits. The defendant nos.1 and 2 were
duly served with Court proceedings. They were
aware about the proceedings. He pointed out that
the chamber summons was also served which they
refused, which shows that they aware about the
proceedings. The defendants intentionally to cover
up their act of serious lapse for not filing written
statement has raised the said issue.
5. On perusal of the record it appears that the writ of
summons of defendant nos.1 and 2 appears to have
been tendered to defendant no.3. There is nothing
on record to show the relation of defendant no.3
with defendant nos.1 and 2. It is not the case that
defendant no.3 is residing at the house of defendant
nos.1 and 2. In that background, mere refusal of
defendants to take the notice of chamber summons
could not amount to deny their right for filing
written statement. The procedure contemplates for
service of writ of summons which appears to have
not been followed. Under this circumstance, notice of
-- 2 of 3 --
3
motion needs consideration. Hence, it is expedient
to pass following order:
ORDER
1.Notice of Motion No.2075/2019 is allowed in terms
of prayer clause (a) to (c).
2. Notice of motion is accordingly disposed off.
15/07/2019 M.SALMAN AZMI
CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR.MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 15/07/2019
Transcribed on : 16/07/2019
Signed on : 19/07/2019
'CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
19/07/19 at 1.00 pm.
MRS.T.C.KAMBLE
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI M.S.AZMI, CR NO.1
Date of Pronouncement of
judgment/order
15/07/2019
Judgment and order signed by P.O. 19/07/2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 19/07/2019
-- 3 of 3 --