Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: MHCC010069202019
CNR NO. MHCC010069202019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2524 OF 2019
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.947 OF 2017
Kantilal C. Jain ] … Plaintiff
V/s.
1. M/s. Gambs India Pvt. Ltd. ]
2. Sanjay Hirani ] ... Defendants
Appearances :-
Ld. Adv. Mr. Rahul Chaube h/f Suresh Jain for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Laxman Shah for defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. R.K. KSHIRSAGAR
(C.R.No.13)
DATED : 30th September, 2021
ORAL ORDER
1. The present Notice of Motion is filed by the defendants to
condone the delay of 450 days in filing written statement / defense of
the defendants.
-- 1 of 4 --
- 2 - NM 2524/19 in
Sum.Suit 947/17
2. It was submitted that the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery
of amount. The defendants were served with the copy of summons and
they filed Vakalatnama. In the month of August, 2016 there was a
major fire in his premises and everything was burnt. The defendants
suffered huge losses and they were in the process of rebuilding his
business. All the documents and other transactions were also burnt.
Also the father of defendant was facing serious old age health issues
and therefore the defendants could not file their defense. The delay
was not intentional and therefore, it be condoned.
3, The plaintiff filed reply and denied the contentions of the
defendants. It was submitted that there is no case for condonation of
delay. The defendants deliberately failed to file reply to the Summons
for Judgement. The defendant raised vague statement in the affidavit.
There is no explanation for the delay and therefore the Notice of Motion
be rejected.
4. Heard Learned Advocates for both the parties. It appears
that the defendants appeared after service of summons and filed their
vakalatnama. However, due to the reasons stated in the affidavit the
defendants could not file their defense/ reply to the Summons for
Judgement. The reasons mentioned in the affidavit appears to be
sufficient cause for not filling the defense. It appears that due to the
circumstances and major fire in the premises of the defendant the
defense could not be filed. In order to decide the matter on merits it
would be proper to condone the delay. If the defendant is not allowed
to raise his defense, the defendants will suffer irreparable loss.
-- 2 of 4 --
- 3 - NM 2524/19 in
Sum.Suit 947/17
Therefore, for the adjudication of the matter on merits the delay is to be
condoned. No such prejudice will cause to the plaintiff. Hence, I
proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
1. The Notice of Motion no. 2524 of 2019 is allowed subject to
payment of costs of Rs.3,000/- (Rs. Three Thousand only) to be paid to
the plaintiff on next date without fail.
2. The delay in filing reply to the Summons for judgment is condoned.
3. After depositing of costs the defendant shall file their reply to
Summons for judgment.
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Dt.: 30-09-2021 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 30-09-2021
Transcribed on : 05-10-2021
checked on : 06-10-2021
Signed on : 06-10-2021
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 3 of 4 --
- 4 - NM 2524/19 in
Sum.Suit 947/17
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
06.10.2021 at 03.10 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (HHJ Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 30.09.2021
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 06.10.2021
Judgment/order uploaded on 06.10.2021
-- 4 of 4 --