Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: .. 1 .. N/M No. 3107/19 in Suit No.2390/13
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3107 OF 2019
IN
Suit No. 2390 OF 2013.
M/s Saur Jagat ...Applicant.
In the matter between:
Dastagir Khan S/o Jahangir Khan ...Plaintiff.
V/s.
State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Defendants.
Adv. Mr. Tripathi for the Plaintiff.
Adv. Ms. Doshi for Defendant No. 7.
Adv. Mr. Saurabh Chitnis for Defendant No. 6
Adv. Pushpa Thapa h/f Prabhu for MHADA Defendant no. 5
Adv. Trivedi for SRA/Defendant4.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
MS. S. P. PONKSHE.
(Court Room No.12).
DATED : 17th SEPTEMBER, 2019.
ORDER
1. This Notice of Motion has been taken out by Defendant
No. 7 for recalling of order dated 18.04.2019.
2. Partner of Defendant No. 7 has filed affidavit in support
of the Notice of Motion.
3. The Plaintiff has filed affidavit in reply by filing affidavit
of Dastagir Khan son of Jahangir Khan . It seems that on 18.04.2019,
no reply to Notice of Motion of the Plaintiff order has been passed.
-- 1 of 4 --
.. 2 .. N/M No. 3107/19 in Suit No.2390/13
4. In affidavit in support of Notice of Motion, Defendant
No. 7 has shown cause disclosing why the delay has been caused in
filing reply. In order to decide Notice of Motion of the Plaintiff on its
merits, it is just to give opportunity to Defendant No. 7 to file reply to
the Notice of Motion. If Notice of Motion is allowed, no prejudice
would be caused to the Plaintiff. Considering delay caused for want
of reply on record to proceed further in the suit, costs is to be
imposed upon Defendant No. 7 while allowing this Notice of Motion.
Thus, this Notice of Motion is to be absolute. With this I proceed to
pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 3107 of 2019 is made absolute, subject to
payment of costs of Rs.1000/ payable by Defendant No. 7 to
the Plaintiff forthwith.
2. On payment of costs, Defendant No. 7 is permitted to file reply
to Notice of Motion.
3. Notice of Motion No. 3107 of 2019 stands disposed of
accordingly.
(S. P. PONKSHE)
Judge,
City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
Dated : 17.09.2019.
Dictated on : 17.09.2019.
Typed on : 21.09.2019.
Signed by HHJ on :
-- 2 of 4 --
.. 3 .. N/M No. 3107/19 in Suit No.2390/13
(28)
17.09.2019
SU 2390/13
CORAM : H. H. J. MS. S. P. PONKSHE (C.R.NO.12)
*******
Adv. Tripathi for the Plaintiff present.
Affidavit in reply to N/M no. 3107/19 tendered by the Plain
t.o.r.
Affidavit in reply to N/M no. 3108/19 tendered by the Plain
t.o.r.
Adv. Mr. Saurabh Chitnis for Defendant no. 6 present.
Adv. Ms. Doshi for Defendant no. 7 present.
Adv. Pushpa Thapa h/f Prabhu for MHADA/deft no. 5 present.
Adv. Trivedi for SRA/Defendant4 present.
FRSR the following order is passed. Dictated in open court.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 3107/2019 is made absolute, subject to payme
costs of Rs.1000/- payen det no. 7 to the Plaintiff forthwith.
2. On payment of costs, Defendant no. 7 is permitted to file reply to N/
accordingly 3107/19 stands disposed of.
Defendant no. 7 has paid costs to the Plaintiff.
Hence, reply tendered by Defendant no. 7 to N/M no. 4869/18. t.o.r.
Order passed in N/M no. 3108/19
FRSR the following order is passed. Dictated in open court.
ORDER
This N/M has been taken out by Defendant no. 6 for recallin
order dtd 18.04.2019. Secretary of Defendant no. 6 has
affidavit in support of the N/M. The Plaintiff has filed affidav
reply by filing affidavit of Dastagir Khan son of Jahangir Khan .
It seems that on 18.04.2019, no reply to N/M of the Plai
order has been passed. In affidavit in support of N/M, Defen
no. 6 has shown cause disclosing why the delay has been cause
filing reply. In order to decide N/M of the Plaintiff on its meri
is just to give opporutity to Defendant no. 6 to file reply to
N/M. If N/M is allslowed no prejudice would be caused to
Plaintiff. Considering delay caused for want of reply on recor
proceed further in the suit, costs is to be imposed upon def tn
while allowing this N/M. Thus, this N/M is to be absolute. W
this I present
Order.
NM no. 3108/19 is made absolute subject to payment of costs of Rs.1
-- 3 of 4 --
.. 4 .. N/M No. 3107/19 in Suit No.2390/13
payen det no. 6 to the Plaintiff forthwith.
2. alrady tendered reply of Defendant no. 6 be taken on record.
3. accordingly 3108/19 stands disposed of.
Defendant no. 6 has paid costs to the Plaintiff.
Hence, already tendered reply of Defendant no. 6 to N/M no.
4869/18. t.o.r.
Defendant no. 6 is directed to furnish copy of reply to the Plaintiff
on or before next date.
Earlier ad interim order be continued till next date.
Matter is adjd. to 7.10.2019 for N/M no. 4869/18 hearing/
N/M of Defendant no. 6 and 7 hearing/ contempt N/M
hearing/ passing no WS order.
Judge
-- 4 of 4 --