Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3047 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.2481 OF 2018
M/s. Plywood Park Pvt. Ltd. … Plaintiff
V/s.
M/s. Pramod Interiors … Defendant
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Deepak Salunkhe for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Girish Pawar for defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI MILIND V. KURTADIKAR
(C.R. No.20)
DATED : 25th SEPTEMBER, 2019
ORDER
Defendant has taken out this notice of motion for setting
aside no written statement order dated 14.03.2019 by condoning the
delay of 99 days.
2. It is argued on behalf of defendant that after receipt the
suit summons he approached the advocate by signing the Vakalatnama.
Therefore, he was under bonafide belief that his advocate might have
appeared on his behalf and taking necessary steps. In those days
because of busy business schedule as well as because of mental trauma
defendant did not keep proper follow up. Meanwhile he learnt that his
advocate only appeared but not carried out further necessary
proceedings. Therefore, Court has passed no written statement order.
MHCC010083172019
-- 1 of 3 --
NM 3047/2019 .. 2 .. Suit No.2481/2018
Defendant has every hope of success in the matter. If he is not allowed
to file written statement it will cause great hardship to him. Therefore
he be allowed to file written statement by setting aside no written
statement order.
3. Plaintiff has resisted the application on the ground that no
case is made out for grant of the prayer. The delay is not properly
explained. The grounds are flimsy. Therefore the application may not
be allowed.
4. It is a matter of record that on 22.02.2019 defendant has
put his appearance though advocate. Accordingly, matter was posted
on 14.03.2019 for filing written statement. However, as per roznama of
14.03.2019 none was present for defendant when the matter was called
out. Hence, Court has passed no written statement order. The
defendant has taken out notice of motion on 24.06.2019. On the point
of delay it is the defence of defendant that at the relevant time he was
traveling out of town and was suffering from mental trauma. In
absence of any contrary material I have no reason to disbelieve said
defence. Apart from it, it is always better to decide matter on giving full
and fair opportunity to both the sides. No one should be condemned
unheard. Therefore, I am of the opinion that opportunity needs to
given to the defendant to file the written statement on record. In case
of delay certain cost can be imposed. Accordingly the order.
ORDER
1. NM No.3047/19 in SU No.2481/18 is hereby allowed.
2. No written statement order dated 14.03.2019 and the
delay of 99 days is hereby set aside on defendant paying
-- 2 of 3 --
NM 3047/2019 .. 3 .. Suit No.2481/2018
cost of Rs. 5,000/ to plaintiff or to deposit it in the Court
on or before next date.
3. On compliance of cost order the written statement of
defendants be taken on record.
( MILIND V. KURTADIKAR )
Judge, (C.R. No.20)
Dt.: 25/09/2019. City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on : 25.09.2019
Transcribed on : 26.09.2019
Signed on : 27.09.2019
sbk/
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
27.09.2019 05.30 p.m. Sanjay B. Kaskar
(Stenographer H.G.)
Name of the Judge HHJ Shri M.V. Kurtadikar
(CR No.20)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgement/Order.
25.09.2019.
Judgement/order signed by P.O on 26.09.2019.
Judgement/order uploaded on 27.09.2019.
-- 3 of 3 --