Order 3

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: Ch/s No. 1051 / 2025
Jaiprakash Vs. Mohammad
Order
1 of 5
MHCC010058392025
City Civil and Sessions Court, Mazgaon Greater Mumbai
Court Room No. 31 – Commercial Court
Chamber Summons No. 1051 / 2025
in
Commercial Suit No. 54 / 2019
Mr. Ayub Ismail Mulla … Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Jaiprakash Arun Gupta … Plaintiff
Vs.
Mohammad Jahangir Masood Shaikh … Defendant
Appearances :
Plaintiff : Adv. Dinesh Jain
Applicant in Ch/s. : Adv. Habib Ansari
CORAM : PRASAD P. KULKARNI
COURT ROOM NO.31.
DATE : 12.11.2025
***************************************************************
ORDER
(Delivered on this 12th day of November, 2025)
1. Plaintiff has taken out this Chamber Summons with a prayer
to condone delay of 365 days caused in arraying defendant no. 2 as a
party to the suit and to carry out consequential amendment. Chamber
-- 1 of 5 --
Ch/s No. 1051 / 2025
Jaiprakash Vs. Mohammad
Order
2 of 5
Summons is supported by an affidavit. Proposed defendant no. 2 filed
reply affidavit at Exh.34. I have heard both parties at length.
2. Advocate for plaintiff submits that proposed defendant no. 2
moved a Chamber Summons No. 1092/2021 for adding him as a
necessary party to the suit. That Chamber Summons was allowed on
01.12.2023. Due to reasons mentioned in affidavit annexed with
Chamber Summons, plaintiff was unable to carry out amendment.
Hence, by condoning delay, Chamber Summons may be allowed.
3. Advocate for proposed defendant no. 2 objected the Chamber
Summons on the ground that in fact there is delay of 472 days in
carrying out amendment. To support his submission, he relied on ruling
of Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Moreshar Yadaorao Mahajan Vs.
Vyankatesh Sitaram Bhedi (D) thr. LRS and Ors reported in 2022
LiveLaw (SC) 802. Learned Advocate for proposed defendant no. 2
submits that considering inordinate delay and as grounds are not
satisfactory, Chamber Summons may not be allowed.
4. Considering rival submissions, I have gone through record and
proceeding. Proposed defendant no. 2 i.e. Mr. Ayub Ismail Mulla moved
Chamber Summons No. 1092/2021 with a prayer to add him as a
necessary party to this suit. That Chamber Summons was allowed on
01.12.2023. That Chamber Summons was allowed only after observing
rights of proposed defendant no. 2 in the suit property. So, it is very
evident that, in absence of proposed defendant no. 2, suit can not be
decided comprehensively.
5. Proposed defendant no. 2 in fact is a necessary party to the
-- 2 of 5 --
Ch/s No. 1051 / 2025
Jaiprakash Vs. Mohammad
Order
3 of 5
suit. Evidently, there is a delay of around 400 days in carrying out
amendment. Reasons assigned by plaintiff are that plaintiff is a single
father, who has to look after his home and kids. His younger kid, who is
three years old, was hospitalized due to ailment. The circumstances
were beyond control of plaintiff. Much time was consumed in changing
Advocate for plaintiff. So, amendment could not be carried out.
6. In the Judgment of Moreshar (supra), Hon’ble Apex Court had
discussed concept of necessary party. It says a necessary party is a
person, who ought to have been joined as a party and in whose absence
no effective decree could be passed at all by the Court. Proposed
defendant no. 2 is a necessary party. So, he should be there on record.
Thus, grounds mentioned in the Chamber Summons are satisfactory to
condone delay. Hence, Chamber Summons succeed and following order
is passed :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 1051/2025 is allowed, subject to cost
of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten Thousand Only).
2. Plaintiff is permitted to carry out amendment as prayed for
within two weeks and shall supply copy of amended plaint.
3. Plaintiff shall pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to proposed defendant
no. 2 within two weeks and shall file compliance pursis.
4. Chamber Summons No. 1051/2025 is disposed off
accordingly.
5. Order is dictated and pronounced in Open Court.
-- 3 of 5 --
Ch/s No. 1051 / 2025
Jaiprakash Vs. Mohammad
Order
4 of 5
6. Record of Chamber Summons No. 1051/2025 shall form part
of Commercial Suit No. 54/2019.
Mumbai
Dated : 12.11.2025
(Prasad P. Kulkarni)
Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court,
Court Room No.31 - Commercial Court,
Mazgaon, Greater Mumbai
-- 4 of 5 --
Ch/s No. 1051 / 2025
Jaiprakash Vs. Mohammad
Order
5 of 5
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
12.11.2025 2.00 p.m. Prachi Y. Potdar
Stenographer - Grade I
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri. Prasad. P. Kulkarni
(C.R.NO. 31)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
12.11.2025
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 12.11.2025
Judgment/order uploaded on 12.11.2025
-- 5 of 5 --