Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM 2355-2019 in Sum Su 133 of 2018 .. 1 ..
MHCC010064902019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MAZGAON
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2355 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.133 OF 2018
Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. ...Plaintiffs.
Versus
Ashvin Mehta, Proprietor of Shree Silk ... Defendants.
Appearances:
Adv. S. R. Shukla For the plaintiff.
Adv. Lalit Jain For defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
N. B. LAVTE, (C.R.No.83)
DATED : 29th January, 2026
ORAL ORDER
The present Notice of Motion is filed by Mr. Ashvini
Moolchand Mehta who is shown as a proprietor of Shree Silk in
Summary Suit No.133/2018. In the affidavit in support of the
Notice of Motion Mr. Ashvini Mehta claimed that on 20.04.2019 he
received a covering letter dated 13.04.2019 from plaintiff
alongwith copy of order dated 02.03.2019. After going through it,
he came to know that plaintiff had filed the above suit against him
for recovery of Rs.15,56,922.50/- with 18% p.a. It was partly
decreed on 02.03.2019. He is not proprietor of Shree Silk, but is
-- 1 of 5 --
NM 2355-2019 in Sum Su 133 of 2018 .. 2 ..
proprietor of Siddhant Thread firm carrying on business from 220,
Road No.2, GIDC, Sachin, Surat – 394230.
2. He further claimed that Manav Moolchand Mehta
(HUF) is the proprietor of the Shree Silk and certificate of
Importer & Exporter Code dated 01.11.2010 is issued by Ministry
of Commerce and Industry is filed to that effect. Mr. Manav Mehta
is his brother and they are residing separately since 2010. Being
brother, he was helping him for the business, but never did any
transaction with plaintiff as proprietor of Shree Silk. As he was not
proprietor of Shree Silk, therefore, the order and judgment dated
02.03.2019 needs to be set aside by condoning the delay in taking
out the Notice of Motion.
3. By filing reply, the authorized representative Mr.
William Fernandes opposed the Notice of Motion and claimed that
defendant represented them to be a proprietor of Shree Silk.
Plaintiff’s sister concern M/s. Image Commercial Pvt., Ltd., had
initiated proceeding against defendant. It was settled by defendant
in the capacity as proprietor of Shree Silk before the Hindustan
Chamber of Commerce. The legal notice issued to defendant were
not replied. He even failed to appear and deny the suit. The Notice
of Motion is filed with malafide intention in order to escape
liability of paying the decretal amount. Hence, dismissal of Notice
of Motion with costs is prayed.
4. Heard Adv. Lalit Jain for defendant. Whereas, plaintiff filed
written submission Exh.15. According to Adv. Jain defendant is not the
proprietor of Shree Silk. It is his brother Mr. Manav Moolchand Mehta
-- 2 of 5 --
NM 2355-2019 in Sum Su 133 of 2018 .. 3 ..
who is the proprietor. Even, the address of the defendant and Mr.Manav
Mehta are different. Inspite of knowing the said fact, the suit was filed
in the wrong name showing defendant as proprietor. The documents
filed alongwith the Notice of Motion fortifies the claim of defendant
that he is not proprietor. Therefore, prayed for allowing the Notice of
Motion.
5. In the written submission, it is claimed by plaintiff that
defendant represented himself as proprietor of Shree Silk. Even in the
proceedings filed by sister concern of plaintiff, defendant appeared and
settled the matter in the capacity of proprietor of Shree Silk. Thus, it
demonstrates defendant is the proprietor. The Certificate of Importer-
Exporter Code is of 2010, whereas, the invoices are of 2016, therefore,
the certificate cannot be relied upon. Hence, dismissal of Notice of
Motion is prayed.
6. The record reveals suit was decreed on 02.03.2019. It
proceeded ex-parte. The defendant by filing present Notice of Motion is
claiming that he is not the proprietor of Shree Silk. In order to
substantiate it he has filed on record the copy of Certificate issued by
Ministry of Commerce and Industry dated 01.11.2010 in which name of
Manav Moolchand Mehta (HUF) appears as owner of Shree Silk. The
documents relied by the plaintiffs alongwith the reply reveals defendant
had issued letter to M/s. Image Commercial Private Limited in Mumbai
regarding full and final settlement of balance amount for and on behalf
of Shree Silk. It bears signature of defendant. The cheque issued in
respect of settlement also bears signature of defendant for Shree Silk as
Karta/Manager.
7. Event the letter issued by Hindustan Chamber of Commerce
to defendant shows the defendant as proprietor of Shree Silk. The
-- 3 of 5 --
NM 2355-2019 in Sum Su 133 of 2018 .. 4 ..
umpteen documents filed on record by the plaintiff goes to show that
the defendant had settled the matter as proprietor of Shree Silk with
sister concern of plaintiff. He even appeared before the Hindustan
Chamber of Commerce as proprietor of Shree Silk. Therefore, the
documentary evidence lead to one and only conclusion that defendant
was the proprietor of Shree Silk. No any rejoinder is filed to the reply
and documents nor any argument to that effect was advanced.
8. As regards the Certificate issued by the Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, it was issued on 01.11.2010, whereas, the disputed invoices
were between 15.10.2016 to 17.11.2016. No any latest certificate to
that effect is filed. Therefore, it leads to the conclusion that the
defendant represented as proprietor of Shree Silk with whom the
plaintiff had business deal and towards which the invoices were issued.
Therefore, defendant cannot escape the liability by making excuse that
he is not the proprietor of Shree Silk. Hence, no any grounds are made
to set aside the judgment and decree dated 02.03.2019. In the result, I
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
1. The Notice of Motion No.2355 of 2019 in Summary Suit
No.133/2018 is dismissed.
2. The Notice of Motion No.2355 of 2019 is disposed of accordingly.
( N. B. Lavte)
Judge, (C.R.No.83)
Dt.: 29.01.2026. City Civil Court, Mazgaon,
MUMBAI MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 29.01.2026.
Transcribed on : 30.01.2026.
checked on : 30.01.2026.
Signed on : 30.01.2026. ( N. B. Lavte )
Judge, (C.R.No.83)
City Civil Court, Mazgaon,
MUMBAI.
-- 4 of 5 --
NM 2355-2019 in Sum Su 133 of 2018 .. 5 ..
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
30.01.2026 at 5.50 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME (MANISHA SRINATH)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge H.H.J.Shri N. B. Lavte
(COURT ROOM NO.83)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
29.01.2026.
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 30.01.2026.
Judgment/order uploaded on
due to close of cis.
30.01.2026.
-- 5 of 5 --