Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 2878/19(Suit 2597/18)
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.2878/2019
(CNR NO.MHCC010079352019)
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 2597/2018
Rakeshkumar Harishankar Dubey ..Plaintiff
V/s.
Praful Dwivedi and Ors. .. Defendants.
Appearances :
Adv. S.N. Reddy for plaintiff.
Adv. Anil Dubey for defendants.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
Additional Judge
CR No. : 03
Date : 26.10.2021.
ORDER
1. Defendants filed instant Notice of Motion for condonation
of 205 days delay in filing Written Statement. It is contended by the
defendants that, they were served with suit summons on 19.10.2018.
Thereafter, they have contacted their advocate but due to
communication gap and unforeseeable circumstances, their advocate
could not appear and file Vakalatnama. Thereafter, they have appointed
Adv. Sunny Jain, who filed Vakalatnama on 30.3.2019 on their behalf.
2. It is contended that, due to lack of guidance from advocate
and miscommunication , delay of 205 days has been occurred, which is
not intentional. Hence, defendants prayed for allowing the Motion.
3. Per contra, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff opposed the
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM 2878/19(Suit 2597/18)
Motion by filing reply and contended that, the defendants did not
calculate the delay properly. No cogent and sufficient reasons assigned
to condone the delay. It is further argued that, in the event the delay is
condoned , heavy costs be imposed.
4. Heard both sides. Perused Motion and reply. Admittedly,
the suit summons were served upon the defendants on 19.10.2018. It
appears that, on 5.1.2019, one Adv. Jain appeared on behalf of the
defendants and undertook to file Vakalatnama. However, on next date,
nobody appeared for the defendants and therefore, suit proceeded
without W.S. Thereafter, on 29.7.2019, it appears that, one Adv. Jain
again appeared and tendered draft Motion. The defendants stated on
oath that there was a miscommunication between them and advocate.
The plaintiff has filed present suit for damages. Therefore, I am of the
view that, the suit should be decided on merits by granting an
opportunity to defend the suit. I am of the view that, by imposing costs,
the defendants can be allowed to tender their W.S due to which no
prejudice will be caused to the plaintiff. Thus, I proceed to pass
following order :
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 2878/2019 is allowed in terms of prayer
clause(a).
2. The delay of 205 days in filing the W.S. is condoned subject to
payment of costs of Rs.10,000/ (Rs. Ten Thousand only) to the
plaintiff within a period of 15 days from the date of order.
3. Upon payment of aforesaid costs, the W.S be taken on record.
4. The defendant is directed to serve copy of W.S. to the plaintiff.
5. Defendants to bear the costs of Notice of Motion.
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM 2878/19(Suit 2597/18)
6. Notice of Motion is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Dated : 26.10.2021 Greater Bombay.
Dictated on : 26.10.2021
Typed on : 28.10.2021
Signed on : 29.10.2021
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM 2878/19(Suit 2597/18)
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
28.10.21, at 11.15 am (Nitin V. Ubale)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Selection Gr. Stenographer(Gr.1)
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.3)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/ ORDER 26/10/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 29/10/2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 29/10/2021
-- 4 of 4 --