Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: MHCC010070622019
CNR NO. MHCC010070622019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1265 OF 2019
IN
S. C. SUIT NO.3488 OF 2010
(HIGH COURT SUIT NO.940 OF 2010)
1. Rajan Gopinath Khot & Anr. ] … Plaintiffs
V/s.
1. Prafulla Kamlakar Gavande & Ors. ] ....Defendants
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Mr. Rajeev Matkar for plaintiffs.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Archit Malhotra for defendants.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. R.K. KSHIRSAGAR
(C.R.No.13)
DATED : 4th March, 2022
ORAL ORDER
1. The present Chamber Summons is taken out by the plaintiff
for strucking out paragraphs to be ignored and declared as inadmissible
in evidence.
2. The Learned Advocate for defendant No.4 submitted that
the portions of deposition in affidavit of evidence of P.W.1 dated
-- 1 of 4 --
2 CHS 1265/2019 in Suit 3488/2010
21.07.2016 be strucked out and some portions in para No.8, 10, 12 to
14 and 16 to 22 be struck out. It was submitted that some of the
paragraphs of the evidence of P.W.1 are beyond pleadings and
irrelevant as it relates to the events occured after the institution of suit
and therefore, the subsequent events are not relevant for the purpose of
adjudication of present suit and therefore the said portion be struck out.
3. The plaintiff filed reply and denied the contention of
defendant. It was submitted that the present Chamber Summons is not
maintainable as it is not covering any of the chamber work covered
under Rule No.43 of Bombay City Civil Court Rules. The defendant
cannot apply for amendment of his evidence under the said rule. The
Advocate for defendants has already crossexamined regarding the said
paras of the affidavit of evidence and now it cannot be struck off. The
present Chamber Summons is filed only to prolong the matter and
hence it be rejected.
4. Heard the Learned Advocate for plaintiffs. The Learned
Advocate for defendant No.4 failed to argue. Even though several
chances were given, the Advocate for defendant No.4 failed to aruge.
5. After going through the submissions it seems that the
present suit is filed for the possession of the suit flat under Section 6 of
Specific Relief Act. The plaintiff No.1 herein is under cross
examination. The part crossexamination has been recorded. It also
seems that the defendant has crossexamined P.W.1 on certain paras
mentioned in the Chamber Summons. It is the contention of defendant
that the said paras of the affidavit are beyond the pleadings and are of
the subsequent event after institution of suit. As such the defendant
-- 2 of 4 --
3 CHS 1265/2019 in Suit 3488/2010
had already crossexamined in respect of the said paras. Moreover,
there is no provision to struck out the portion of the affidavit of any
witness once it is filed on record and therefore, the present Chamber
Summons is without any substance. I, therefore, proceed to pass the
following Order:
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No.1265 of 2019 is dismissed.
2. Parties to bear their own costs.
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Dt.: 04032022 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 04032022
Transcribed on : 04032022
checked on : 05032022
Signed on : 05032022
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 3 of 4 --
4 CHS 1265/2019 in Suit 3488/2010
ERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
05.03.2022 at 04.20 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge ( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
04.03.2022
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 05.03.2022
Judgment/order uploaded on 05.03.2022
-- 4 of 4 --