Date: 07-09-2019
Business: the court is on leave
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 23-09-2019
Date: 23-09-2019
Business: Adv. Patki for plaintiff present.
Adv. Jadhav for defendant present.
At request of plaintiff, Matter stands Adj for reply to 13.11.19.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 13-11-2019
Date: 13-11-2019
Business: Adv. Pataki for plaintiff present.
Adv. Jadhav for defendant 10(a) to (b), 11, 13 to 15 present and filed original NM no. 2751/19 along with affidavit.
Matter stands Adj for reply to NM on 14.01.20.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 14-01-2020
Date: 14-01-2020
Business: Matter stands Adj for NM Hearing to 28.02.2020.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 28-02-2020
Date: 28-02-2020
Business: Adv. Saurabh for plaintiff present and seeks permission to file reply and filed application for setting aside no reply order. Application filed on behalf of plaintiff for setting aside no reply order. Ld. counsel for defendant no. 10(a) and (b), 11, 13 to 15 has no objection. O-heard both sides. Application is allowed in the interest of justice and no reply order dated 14.01.2020 is hereby set aside and reply is taken on record. Adv. Jadhav for defendant no. 10(a) and (b), 11, 13 to 15 present and filed WS. Heard Ld. counsel for both sides on NM no. 2751/19. It is submitted by the Ld. counsel for defendants and there has been delay of about 10 months and 14 days in filing WS by the defendants no. 10(a) and (b), 11, 13 to 15. In this regards, he has relied on the affidavit filed by Devendra Bhushan Jain in support of the NM. It is submitted in paragraph no. 4 of the affidavit that the defendants were served with the writ of summons on 24.01.2017. After receiving the writ of summons the defendants collected the documents from the old record in the possession of original defendant no. 10 in respect of the suit property. It took considerable time and after giving instruction to the counsel, the WS is prepared and submitted to the court today. Under the above circumstances delay of 10 months and 14 days has taken place. It may be condoned in the interest of justice. Ld. counsel for plaintiff has strongly opposed the motion and relied on the affidavit of Sunita Jain, plaintiff no. 2 and submitted that there is no substance in the grounds stated in the supporting affidavit filed with the motion. Motion is not bonafide. The explanation given by the defendant is not satisfactory. The defendants have been negligent in the matter and not entitled for any relief. Hence, motion may be dismissed. I have gone through the grounds stated in the motion and reply affidavit and taken into consideration oral submissions made by Ld. counsel for both the sides. The delay of 10 months and 14 days is substantial one, though it has been explained by the defendants in the supporting affidavit. Considering the facts and circumstances brought on record by the defendants, I am of the opinion that the delay in the present case can be condoned subject to reasonable costs so as to compensate the plaintiff. In view of the above, The NM no. 2751/19 is hereby allowed subject to costs of Rs. 1,000/- to be paid by the defendants no. 10(a) and (b), 11, 13 to 15 to the plaintiff/deposited in the court within four weeks from today. If the above direction is complied with, the WS submitted by defendant no. 10(a) and (b), 11, 13 to 15 shall be taken on record. NM is disposed of accordingly. Matter stands Adj for Compliance to 27.03.2020.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 28-02-2020
