Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.969 OF 2018
IN
STAY APPLICATION NO.100146 OF 2016
IN
CHARITY APPLICATION NO.10013 OF 2017
Mukund Boiraj Bhoir & Anr ...Applicants.
V/s.
Mrs.Mira Korde & ors. ...Respondents
Appearances:
Ld. Adv. A.L. Gore for applicants.
Ld. Adv. N.A. Gharkar for respondent Nos.1,3,4,5,11,17, 18 and 19.
Ld. Adv. Parth Zaveri for respondent No.9.
Ld. Adv. Jayant Parab for Charity Commissioner.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI ABHIJEET A.
NANDGAONKAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATED : 15th April,2019
ORDER
By way of this chamber summons respondent Nos.1,3,4,5,11,17,
18 and 19 prayed for amendment as per schedule attached in the reply
to the Stay Application No.100146 of 2016 filed in Charity Application
No.10013 of 2017.
2. In supporting affidavit of Mahendra Chemburkar, the authorized
representative of MAGA on behalf of respondent Nos.1,3,4, 5,11,17, 18
and 19 submitted that applicant filed this charity application being
aggrieved against the order of learned Joint Charity Commissioner
dt.31.08.2016 in Appeal No.35 of 2012 in Inquiry No.1353 of 2010
order dt.08.02.2011. After service of the notice of this application they
MHCC01-007115-2018
-- 1 of 4 --
CS 969/2018 .. 2 .. CA 10013/17
appointed an Advocate and also shown their appearance and submitted
that they will file draft reply. However, due to appointment of new
Advocate the reply was drafted in short span of time and therefore, it
requires clarification to be brought on record. Therefore, it is necessary
that by way of proposed amendment the respondents seek to clarify the
ambiguity by altering and amending their reply. It will not change the
defence nor it will cause prejudice to the other side. They are not
intending to improve their case and therefore, prayed that in the
interest of justice and equity chamber summons be allowed and they be
permitted to carry out their reply in the stay application to the charity
application.
3. After service of the chamber respondent No.9 submitted that they
did not want to file reply to the chamber summons. Learned counsel
for applicants not appeared to file reply. On the other hand another
respondents have also not objected for the same.
4. In the backdrop of this and after going through the submissions
of respondents if present respondents are permitted to clarify the
circumstances, it will not change the nature of defence put forth by
them in their reply towards stay application in charity application nor it
will create new case. On the other hand for proper appreciation of the
facts and to remove the ambiguity, they sought amendment by seeking
some alterations in the reply.
5. Therefore, to determine the real questions of controversy
involved between the parties, the proposed amendment needs to be
allowed. It will not change the nature of defence nor it will cause
prejudice or injury to the other side. It is even not barred by law of
-- 2 of 4 --
CS 969/2018 .. 3 .. CA 10013/17
limitation or bar of commencement of trial come into picture. Due
diligence is shown by the respondent when they have come across to
the errors due to inadvertence and bonafide mistake, which sought to
be rectified to clear the ambiguity in respect of pleadings.
6. The reasons mentioned that in short span of time after
appointment of new Advocate the draft reply was prepared, may be one
of the reason, which is reasonably explained. Therefore, if proposed
amendment is brought on record it will subserve the ends of justice
and it will also helpful to decide the matter properly, effectually and
completely. In the circumstances, it will be proper to direct the parties
to bear their costs. Hence, proposed amendment in the reply sought by
way of this chamber summons needs to be made absolute. Hence, I
proceed to pass the following order :
O R D E R
1. Chamber Summons No.969 of 2018 in Stay Application
No.100146 of 2016 in Charity Application No.10013 of
2017 is made absolute.
2. The respondent Nos.1,3,4,5,11,17, 18 and 19 are permitted
to carry out the amendment as per schedule attached to the
chamber summons.
3. Amendment be carried out within 14 days and amended
copy of the reply be tendered on record and served to the
applicants and other respondents.
4. Parties to bear their costs.
( ABHIJEET A. NANDGAONKAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 15/04/2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 15.04.2019
Transcribed on : 15.04.2019
Signed on : 15.04.2019
kps/
-- 3 of 4 --
CS 969/2018 .. 4 .. CA 10013/17
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
16.04.2019 at 10.47 a.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(KISHOR PRAKASH SHERWADE)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI A.A.
NANDGAONKAR
(COURT ROOM NO.20)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 15.04.2019
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 15.04.2019
Judgment/order uploaded on 16.04.2019
-- 4 of 4 --