Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM No.2679/2019 ..1.. Suit No.2318/2013
CNR No.MHCC0173362019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2679 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO.2318 OF 2013
Mr. Sunil Sachu Bablani and another .. Plaintiffs
Versus
M/s. Runwal constructions .. Defendant
Mr. B.R. Dalal, advocate for plaintiffs
Ms. Neha Joshi, advocate for defendant
CORAM : M. T. ASIM, J
COURT ROOM NO.02
DATED : 18th July, 2019
ORAL ORDER
Read notice of motion, affidavit in support of it, reply of defendant
and pleadings of the parties. Heard learned counsel for both sides.
2. Notice of motion is taken out by the plaintiffs making prayer to
direct defendant to give inspection of documents referred to and relied
upon by them in their written statement and additional written
statement.
3. It is contended that counsel/advocate for plaintiffs had given
letter dated 22.06.2019 addressed to defendant's advocate firm 'HSA
Advocates' but they refused to accept the same on the ground that they
are no more advocates for defendant. Therefore, plaintiff by their
advocate letter dated 24.06.2019 addressed to defendant calling upon
-- 1 of 4 --
NM No.2679/2019 ..2.. Suit No.2318/2013
them to give inspection in relation to documents relied in written
statement as well as additional written statement. Defendant has
neither given inspection of those documents nor fixed date, time and
place for such inspection. Accordingly, plaintiffs have filed present
notice of motion seeking relief in above term.
4. Defendant opposed notice of motion on the count that defendant
has filed a notice of motion under Order VII Rule 11 of CPC which
ought to be heard before present notice of motion. However, during
course of argument learned advocate for defendant submitted that
defendant is ready to give inspection of documents.
5. At the outset I would like to mention that plaintiffs ought to have
filed chamber summons as per Rule 43 of Bombay City Civil & Sessions
Court Rules, 1948 for above purpose instead of notice of motion. But
keeping in view that matter is more than Five years old and submission
of learned advocate for defendant about readiness of defendant to give
inspection of documents, I am not going into said technical aspect.
6. It is clear that defendant has relied upon certain documents as
per list annexed to the written statement but has not annexed various
judgments passed by the Hon'ble Courts and other Authorities including
Ministry of Environment & Forest Department etc. They have also
referred and relied upon certain documents in their additional written
statement but those documents are not produced. In present case,
issues are already framed. No doubt, plaintiffs have not given notice for
inspection of documents to the defendant before or at the time of
settlement of issues as per Order XI Rule 15 of CPC. May it be so,
plaintiffs have given notice to the defendant subsequently. It is to be
-- 2 of 4 --
NM No.2679/2019 ..3.. Suit No.2318/2013
noted that in view of section 30 of CPC, the Court has power to direct
any party to the suit to give inspection of the documents. There is
nothing on record to suggest that in response to the said notice,
defendant either given inspection of the documents referred and relied
in the pleadings by them or fixed date, time and place for giving
inspection of such documents. Keeping in view facts of the matter I am
of the view that for fair disposal of suit it is necessary to direct
defendant to give inspection of the documents referred/relied by them
in their written statement and additional written statement. Hence,
pass following order:
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.2679 of 2019 is allowed and made absolute
in terms of prayer clause (a).
2. Defendant is directed to give inspection of the documents
referred/relied by them in their written statement and
additional written statement within period of 10 days from the
date of this order to the plaintiffs by giving intimation of date,
time and place of inspection.
3. Accordingly, notice of motion is disposed off.
(M. T. Asim)
Judge
Date : 18.07.2019 Gr. Bombay
Typed on : 18.07.2019
HHJ signed on :
-- 3 of 4 --
NM No.2679/2019 ..4.. Suit No.2318/2013
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
20.07.2019, 5.35 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Mrs. S. P. Pawar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
H.H.J. Shri. M. T. Asim
C.R.No.02
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
18.07.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
19.07.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 20.07.2019
-- 4 of 4 --