Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: C/S 954/18 in Su 7778/00 1/3 Date : 24.8.2018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT, AT MUMBAI
CNR No.MHCC010070642018
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.954/2018
IN
SUIT NO.7778/2000
Ashok Agarwal ]... Plaintiff
V/s.
Mr. Ravinder Kumar Agarwal ]… Defendants
Adv. Jani for plaintiff.
Adv. Harjani for defendants no.1 to 4.
CORAM : HHJ Shri G. R. Agrawal
C. R. No.03
DATE : 24.08.2018
ORDER
(Dictated in open court)
1. By this chamber summons, the defendants no.1 to 4 are seeking
permission to amend the written statement as per the schedule annexed
thereto.
2. Heard Ld. Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
3. By the proposed amendment, the defendants no.1 to 4 are seeking
permission to delete and substitute few words in paragraph no.5(h) of
their written statement.
4. There is no dispute that the present chamber summons has been
preferred by defendants no.1 to 4 in view of reply filed by the plaintiff
to the earlier chamber summons i.e. chamber summons no.782/2018. It
-- 1 of 3 --
C/S 954/18 in Su 7778/00 2/3 Date : 24.8.2018
is stated in paragraph no.4 of the affidavit filed in support of chamber
summons that on reading the reply filed by the plaintiff, defendants no.1
to 4 realized that there are obvious and apparent mistakes in
paragraph no.5 (h) and as such they want to rectify the same. The Ld.
Counsel for defendants no.1 to 4 has urged that instead of word
“defendant” used in paragraph no.5(h) the word “deceased” should
have been incorporated in the written statement. The Ld. Counsel for
plaintiff has vehemently opposed this amendment on the ground that it
is malafide and this prayer is made by the defendants due to the reply
filed by plaintiff in chamber summons no.782/2018.
5. On hearing the Ld. Counsel for the parties, I find that it is
apparent that the defendants no.1 to 4 are seeking the present
amendment in order to show that the amendment sought in chamber
summons no.782/2018 is not contradictory. If the present amendment
is allowed, it will have the effect of changing the entire meaning of
paragraph no.5(h) of the written statement. When this Court put
specific query to the Ld. Counsel for defendants no.1 to 4 whether the
proposed corrections in paragraph no.5(h) are supported from the
pleadings made in the other paragraphs of the written statement, the Ld.
Counsel fairly stated that there is no other pleading to indicate that there
are apparent mistakes or errors in paragraph no.5(h). It is therefore,
clear that the proposed amendment is only an attempt to support the
amendment sought in chamber summons no.782/2018. It is pertinent to
note that defendants no.1 to 4 did not realise these “mistakes” or
“errors” since last 10 years. I find that the proposed amendment is not
bonafide and it will cause injustice to the plaintiff. It is necessary to
note that the main suit is at the stage of crossexamination of PW1
which has been partly recorded. Hence, following order.
-- 2 of 3 --
C/S 954/18 in Su 7778/00 3/3 Date : 24.8.2018
ORDER
The chamber summons no. 954/2018 is dismissed.
(G. R. Agrawal)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Date : 24.08.2018 Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 24.08.2018
Typed on : 24.08.2018
Signed on : 24.08.2018
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER”
28.08.2018 at 3.00 pm (Mrs. S. W. Tuscano)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court
room no.)
HHJ Shri G. R. Agrawal, C.R.
No.3
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
24.08.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
24.08.2018
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
28.08.2018
-- 3 of 3 --