Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: ORDER ..1..
MHCC010064002019
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2310 OF 2019
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 588 OF 2007
(DISPOSED OFF)
IN
SUIT NO. 08/2004
Smt. Devkidevi Mohan Singh. ... Plaintiff/
Decree-Holder
Versus
Chief Manager, Dena Bank, Horniman
Circule, Mumbai 400 001. … Defendant/
Judgment-Debtor.
Appearance:
Adv. Pachpansingh for DHR.
Adv. P.A. Sundharesan for JDR.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
R.R.Patare
COURT NO.2
DATED : 23rd March, 2023
ORAL ORDER
This notice of motion is taken out by Decree Holder
for condonation of delay caused for restoration of execution
application no.588 of 2007 and for restoration of said
execution application. It is stated that execution application
was argued on behalf of decree holder. However due to
-- 1 of 4 --
ORDER ..2..
absence of Judgement debtor the execution application
could not proceed. The decree holder could not attend the
Court on 02.05.2018 due to ill-health of his child and matter
was adjoured to 06.07.2018. The mother of applicant fall ill
on 02.07.2018. She received multiple fractured to her right
leg. As a result of it, she was hospitalized. The applicant
could not contact his advocate due to above mentioned
circumstances. In the month of November 2018, the
advocate informed regarding dismissal of Execution
Application. It is stated that delay of 318 days have caused
for taking out notice of motion for restoration of execution
application.
2. The Judgment debtor has filed reply and opposed the
application. It is contended that Dena bank came to be
merged with Bank of Baroda. It is contended that decree
holder has no cause of action against Bank of Baroda. The
Judgment debtor has requested for dismissal of notice of
motion.
3. Perused averments, evidence and heard advocate for
the parties. From the averments and medical report it is seen
that decree holder Devkidevi was ill. It is seen that her right
leg was fractured. The certificate dated 03.06.2018 is
brought on record. It is further seen that she was under
medical treatment. The decree holder has brought on record
evidence to suggest that absence of decree holder before the
Court was not intentional and deliberate. The delay caused
for filing notice of motion is explained. The merits of the
-- 2 of 4 --
ORDER ..3..
matter cannot be consideration for deciding delay
application. The decree holder has made out case/ground to
condone delay and for restoration of execution application.
Judgement debtor can be compensated for the delay caused
by the decree holder. In the result, following order is passed
to meet both the ends of justice.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 2310 of 2019 is hereby allowed.
2. Delay caused for filing notice of motion is condoned
subject to costs of Rs.3,000/-.
3. Execution application no. 588 of 2007 is restored to
its original stage.
(R.R. Patare)
Judge
City Civil Court, Gr.Mumbai
Date : 23.03.2023
Typed on : 23.03.2023
HHJ signed on : 23.03.2023
-- 3 of 4 --
ORDER ..4..
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
DATED23.03.2023, 5.30 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Mrs. V. N. Rajgole.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
H.H.J. Shri. R.R. Patare.
C.R.No.02
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
23.03.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
23.03.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 23.03.2023
-- 4 of 4 --