Skip to main content
Court Order

Final Order 1

CNR MHCC01006287201920 Apr 2022
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Final Order 1 · 20 Apr 2022 · CNR MHCC010062872019

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 CS 11312019 IN SC SUIT 3472018
MHCC010062872019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1131 OF 2019
IN
S C SUIT NO.347 OF 2018
Shahbullah S/o Haqiqullah Khan ] ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Smt. Mumtaz Begum Sanjin Khan & Anr.]…Defendants.
And
Dharam Chhughomal Kataria ]...Proposed defendant No.3.
Appearance:
Ld Advocate A. N. Nasikwala for the plaintiff.
None present for defendants.
CORAM : K.P. KSHIRSAGAR
JUDGE, (C.R.NO.08)
DATE : 20/4/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Plaintiff has taken out present Chamber Summons for
allowing him to amend the plaint as per schedule.
2. Perused the Chamber Summons, affidavit in support of
same, plaint and documents filed therewith.
3. As the defendants and proposed defendant No.3 failed to
file their reply, the chamber summons is proceeded without their
-- 1 of 4 --
2 CS 11312019 IN SC SUIT 3472018
reply. Heard argument of Ld Advocate for plaintiff. As the defendants
and proposed defendant No.3 remained absent they could not be
heard.
4. Ld Advocate for plaintiff argued that the plaintiff has filed
the present suit for declaration that he is the owner of suit property
and for directing the defendant No.2 to delete the name of defendant
No.1 from the record of right and property card of the suit premises.
The defendant No.1 filed reply to the notice of motion of the plaintiff
and also tendered notice of motion No.2400/18 for condonation of
delay in filing written statement. During the pendency of the suit the
Advocate for defendant No.1 furnished copy of registered conveyance
deed dtd.25/12/2008 whereby defendant No.1 conveyed the suit
property to the proposed defendant No.3. Therefore, it is necessary to
add proposed defendant No.3 as a party to the present suit and to add
the facts which transpired during pendency of the suit and to amend
the prayer clause. The proposed amendment will not cause any
prejudice to the defendants or proposed defendant No.3. It is
necessary for purpose of determining the real question in controversy
between parties. Therefore, Ld Advocate for plaintiff prayed that
chamber summons be made absolute.
5. Perusal of the matter on record reveals that plaintiff has
filed present suit for declaration that he is the owner of suit premises
and for mandatory injunction to direct to defendant No.2 to delete the
name of defendant No.1 in the record of right and property card in
respect of suit property. It appears that during pendency of the suit it
transpired that the defendant No.1 conveyed the suit property to
proposed defendant No.3 as per conveyance deed dtd.25/12/2008. By
-- 2 of 4 --
3 CS 11312019 IN SC SUIT 3472018
the proposed amendment plaintiff wants to add proposed defendant
No.3 as a party to the present suit and plaintiff wants to bring on
record the facts which transpired during pendency of the suit and
plaintiff wants to amend the prayer clause accordingly. The proposed
amendment appears to be necessary for the purpose of determining
real questions in controversy between the parties.
6. Considering the matter on record and facts of the case
and above discussion as the proposed amendment is necessary for the
purpose of determining real question in controversy between the
parties and no prejudice is likely to be caused to the defendants and
proposed defendant, in the interest of the justice the Chamber
Summons deserves to be made absolute.
7. Therefore, the court proceeds to pass the following
order :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No.1131 of 2019 is made absolute.
2. Plaintiff shall carry out amendment as per schedule
within fourteen days from the date of this order.
3. Chamber Summons No. 1131 of 2019 is disposed of
accordingly.
Date : 20/4/2022 (Shri. K.P. Kshirsagar)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 CS 11312019 IN SC SUIT 3472018
Dictated on :20/4/2022.
Checked on :21/4/2022.
Signed on :25/4/2022.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
26/4/2022 Mrs. S.A. Shekade.
Name of the Judge (With Court room
no.)
SHRI K.P. Kshirsagar (Court Room
No.08)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
20/4/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
25/4/2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 26/4/2022
-- 4 of 4 --

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