Interim Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: ..1.. Order in Ch/s.no.906/23 in S.C.Suit 3076/19
MHCC010052352023
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 906 OF 2023
IN
S.C.SUIT NO. 3076 OF 2019
Mrs. Sitabai W/o Jyoti More & Ors. ...Plaintiffs.
Versus
Mrs. Balkrishna Jyoti More & Ors. ...Defendants.
Appearance:
Adv. Vikas Shrivastav for the Plaintiffs.
CORAM : SMT. A.K.MANDAVGADE
AD-HOC JUDGE, (C.R.NO.62)
DATE : 18.08.2026
ORAL ORDER
(Dictated in open Court)
The Chamber summons is filed by the plaintiff No.2 for
allowing amendment in the plaint in cause title as per schedule and
consequential amendment in cause title and body of the plaint as
required for bringing the legal heirs of plaintiff No.1.
2. As per affidavit filed in support of chamber summons the
suit is filed for declaration and injunction. Yet writ of summons is not
served on defendants. Meanwhile plaintiff No.1 expired on
19/05/2022. Plaintiff No.1 has left behind her 10 legal heirs whose
-- 1 of 4 --
..2.. Order in Ch/s.no.906/23 in S.C.Suit 3076/19
names are mentioned in the chamber summons. Out of them some of
the legal heirs are supporting case of the plaintiff. Some are already
party to the suit. The legal heir who is supporting case of the plaintiff is
proposed to be added as plaintiff No.4 and other legal heirs who are not
already party and are not supporting case of the plaintiff or who are not
available for signature may be permitted to be added as defendants.
The present chamber summons is not filed within period of limitation
from the date of death of plaintiff No.1. There is 182 days delay
excluding the period of 90 days. Hence the delay needs to be condoned
and abetment needs to be set aside. The plaintiffs may be allowed to
bring legal heirs of deceased plaintiff No.1 on record. The delay is
caused as plaintiff No.2 had gone to her native place for funeral
ceremonies of plaintiff No.1. Plaintiff No.2 being illiterate was not
aware about the fact of bringing legal heirs on record. Hence could not
inform the advocate about death of plaintiff No.1. Plaintiff No.2 is also
taking treatment. The delay is not intentional. If the application is
allowed then no prejudice will be caused to the defendants. As per
schedule attached to the application names of the parties to be added
are mentioned.
3. None of the defendants and proposed defendants/legal
heirs have filed reply to the chamber summons. As per affidavit of
service, notice issued to defendant No.1 has returned unserved with
remark ‘Deceased’. The chamber summons is duly served on defendants
No.3 to 7. There is deemed service on defendant No.2 as the registered
envelope has returned with remark ‘unclaimed’.
4. As per copy of death certificate of plaintiff No.1 she expired
on 19/05/2022 and present chamber summons is tendered on
27/03/2023. Thus there is delay in filing the chamber summons for
-- 2 of 4 --
..3.. Order in Ch/s.no.906/23 in S.C.Suit 3076/19
bringing legal heirs of deceased plaintiff No.1 on record. Even the
abetment is not set aside within period of 60 days. There is more than 5
months delay. However the suit is filed for relief of declaration
regarding joint occupation and enjoyment rights of legal heirs of
deceased tenant. From the affidavit filed in support of chamber
summons it becomes clear that some of the legal heirs are not
supporting case of the plaintiffs, hence plaintiffs want to add them as
defendant. All the legal heirs are necessary parties to the suit. Though
in chamber summons plaintiff No.2 has prayed for permission to carry
out consequential amendments in body of the plaint, in the schedule
consequential amendment is not mentioned. However, the chamber
summons deserves to be allowed as plaintiffs want to add all the
necessary parties to the suit. At the same time plaintiffs have caused
delay, hence cost needs to be imposed. Hence, I pass following order:-
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No.906 of 2023 is allowed
subject to cost of Rs.1000/- to be deposited at
DLSA within 20 days from the date of this order.
2. After compliance of cost, the plaintiffs shall carry
out necessary amendment in title clause only as per
the schedule.
3. Accordingly, Chamber Summons is disposed of.
(Smt. A.K.Mandavgade)
Ad-hoc Judge
City Civil Court,
Date : 18.08.2026 Gr. Mumbai.
Pronounced on : 18.08.2026
Directly dictated on comp : 18.08.2026
Typed on : 18.08.2026
Checked & Signed on : 18.08.2026
-- 3 of 4 --
..4.. Order in Ch/s.no.906/23 in S.C.Suit 3076/19
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
Mrs. Manisha S. Putta	18.08.2026 5.45 PM
Name of the Judge (With C.R. No.) HHJ Smt. A.K.Mandavgade
(C.R.No. 62)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGEMENT
/ORDER
18.08.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on 18.08.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on 18.08.2026
-- 4 of 4 --