Interim Order 2

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: ..1.. N/M. No.5800/25 (SC No. 2889/2018)
MHCC010138292025
Presented on : 08-10-2025
Registered on : 08-10-2025
Decided on : 29-01-2026
Duration : 00 Y, 3 M, 23 Days
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 5800 OF 2025
IN
S. C. SUIT NO. 2889 OF 2018
1.Mrs.Swati Nandkumar Garud & ors … Applicant
And
1. Smt. Yamunabai Ramu @ Rama Chavan & ors … Plaintiff
V/s.
1. Mrs. Swati Nandkumar Garud & ors … Defendants
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. H. C. SHENDE
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR. BOMBAY
(C. R. NO.65)
DATE : 29th JANUARY, 2026.
Appearance :-
Adv. Vishal Dhamal for the plaintiff.
Adv. Sajid Shaikh for the defendant.
O R D E R
1. The present notice of motion taken out by the defendant
with request that, the order dtd. 30.07.2025 about no cross passed
against the defendant be recalled by condoning the delay if any.
-- 1 of 4 --
..2.. N/M. No.5800/25 (SC No. 2889/2018)
2. The affidavit in support of it filed by the defendant stating
that the concerned advocate was unable to appear because of the
sudden and unavoidable shifting of his office and because of some
miscommunication, confusion nobody remain present before court. So
no cross order dtd.30.07.2025 was passed by the Court. This need to
be set aside by giving opportunity to the defendants to take cross-
examination of plaintiff witness for ends of justice.
3. Reply to the notice of motion filed by the plaintiff by
mentioning that, the defendant are trying to mislead the court by
mentioning cooked up story. The defendents have no good case on
merit, they are prolonging the matter with dishonest intention. The
defendants and their advocate got knowledge of the order. However
the notice of motion was taken out on 29.09.2025. The relief claim and
the notice of motion therefore liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard both sides at length. Perused the record.
5. According to the defendants, their concerned lawyer was
not present in the court and the said order came to be passed. In my
opinion the litigant should not be suffered for any act done or omission
occurred on the part of their advocate. Considering the overall record,
this court thinks it proper to permit the defendants to take cross
examination of the plaintiff which would help to decide the matter
finally on merit by giving proper opportunity to all. Infact no prejudice
would cause to the plaintiff also. At the most the plaintiff can be
compensated with reasonable cost to be paid by the defendant to the
witness.
-- 2 of 4 --
..3.. N/M. No.5800/25 (SC No. 2889/2018)
6. Hence, the court in the circumstances and for the reasons
mentioned above, proceed to pass the following order :
O R D E R
1. Notice of motion No. 5800/2025 in Suit No. 2889/2018 is
allowed.
2 The no cross order Dtd. 30.07.2025 is set aside with
permission to defendant to take cross-examination of the
witness today as the witness is also present, subject to cost
of Rs.500/- be paid to the witness before court.
3. The proceeding of Notice of motion No. 5800/2025 in Suit
No. 2889/2018 is closed
Date : 29.01.2026 (H. C. Shende )
Judge,
City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 29.01.2026
Transcribed on : 30.01.2026
Checked on : 30.01.2026
Corrected & Signed on : 30.01.2026
-- 3 of 4 --
..4.. N/M. No.5800/25 (SC No. 2889/2018)
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
31.01.2026 11.31 a.m. Prajakta K. More-Grade-I
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ Smt. H. C. Shende (C.R. No.65)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
29.01.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
30.01.2026
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 31.01.2026
-- 4 of 4 --