Date: 24-07-2019
Business: Plaintiff present, his advocate is absent.
Adv. Khandagle for MCGM/Deft. present and tendered affidavit in reply to Ch/s. Copy served to other side.
Kept back
L.o. at 4.30 p.m. Adv. Altaf khan for plaintiff present.
Dnyaneshwar Marathe, Road Engineer, Prathmesh Jadhav, Jr.Engg. are present
Partly heard arguments on Ch/s.
Earlier order, if any, to continue till next date.
Adjd to 26.07.2019 for Ch/s and NM hrg.
Next Purpose: C/S HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 26-07-2019
Date: 26-07-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: CS NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2019
Date: 29-07-2019
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv. Khandagle for MCGM/Deft. present.
Kept back.
L.O. at 12.00 noon
Adv. Altaf Khan for plaintiff present and tendered original registered Ch/s No. 1352/19 with affidavit. TOR.
Order on Ch/s No. 1352/19
Perused Ch/s, reply there to and heard both sides. By instant Ch/s to allow plaintiff to amend the plaint, the plaintiff has made three prayers (I) To add Government of Maharashtra as defendant no. 3. (ii) To add averments in respect of various documents (iii) To add prayer for mandatory injunction directing defendant/MCGM to abide by letter dtd. 31.01.2019 and no further steps be taken without following due process of law u/s 520 B (2) of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter MMC Act). The defendant/MCGM strongly objected the Ch/s contending that these points are considered by Hon\''ble Bombay High Court in w. P. No. 213/19 and the instant Ch/s is filed to delay the matter.
After going through the plaint there are averments pertaining to the letter dtd. 31.01.2019 in paragraph no. XIII in the grounds but no relief is claimed in the plaint in respect thereof. After going through the proposed amendment the plaintiff wants to rely upon certain documents in support of his case and wants to add averments in respect of those documents. It means the plaintiff wants to add evidence of the facts narrated in the plaint and not the material facts. In view of Order VI Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter CPC) the plaint shall contain, and contain only, a statement in a concise form of the material facts on which the plaintiff is relying for his claim but not the evidence by which the facts are to be proved. Therefore, the evidence need not be included in the plaint. The plaintiff wants to add Government of Maharashtra as party to throw light on the direction given by it vide letter dtd. 31.01.2019. As stated herein earlier the plaintiff has referred the said letter dtd. 31.01.2019 in his plaint. The party can be added in the suit only if its presence is necessary for the determination of real matter in dispute between the parties in view of Order 1 Rule 10 (1) of CPC. In the facts and the circumstances of this case and after perusal of prayers made in the plaint, presence of Government of Maharashtra as defendant no. 3 is not required to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. Lastly, the plaintiff has requested to add prayer for mandatory injunction against defendant/MCGM to abide by letter dtd. 31.01.2019 of Government of Maharashtra. The defendant/MCGM, being local authority, is bound to follow directions of Government of Maharashtra and mandatory injunction for the same is not at all required. For the reasons given above I do not find merit in the Ch/s and the same is rejected.
Heard, NM arguments of both sides.
Defendant is directed to register draft N/M before next date.
Earlier order, if any, to continue till next date.
Adjd to 30.07.2019 for NM order.
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED
Disposal Date: 29-07-2019
