Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: :1: N.M. No.3400/2019 in Suit No.6559/2003
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3400 OF 2019
CNR NO.: MHCC010092952019
IN
SUIT NO. 6559 OF 2003
M/S SAH & SANGHI ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Smt. Uma Shivnath Pande and Ors. ...Plaintiffs
Versus
M/S SAH & SANGHI ...Defendant
Appearances:
Advocate Mr. Mukharji for the plaintiffs.
Advocate Mr. Atre for the defendant.
CORAM : HER HONOUR ADHOC JUDGE
SONALI P. AGARWAL
(C.R.NO.14)
DATED : 24th OCTOBER, 2019.
ORAL ORDER
This Notice of Motion is filed by defendant to set aside “No Cross
Order” passed against him.
2. Heard argument of Ld. Advocates for the defendant and the
plaintiffs.
-- 1 of 4 --
:2: N.M. No.3400/2019 in Suit No.6559/2003
3. It appears as per contention of defendant, he remained absent
only on one date and No Cross Order came to be passed against him.
Ld. Counsel for the defendant cited judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High
Court (Aurangabad Bench) in case of Babulkhan Wali Mohammad
Khan Pathan Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Writ Petition
No.615/2019, MANU/MH/1655/2019, in which it is held that, “the
Court below ought to have given opportunity to the petitioner permitting
him to crossexamine the witnesses, who are remained to be cross
examined through his Advocate even by obtaining undertaking from the
learned Counsel for accused that he will not seek any adjournment on any
avoidable reasons”. In the case in hand as the Advocate for the
defendant failed to take crossexamination only on one date, the
interest of justice demands to allow him to crossexamine the witness
subject to compensatory cost to be given to plaintiff, therefore, this case
law is squarely applicable to the case in hand.
4. It appears with the Notice of Motion Authority letter is produced
by applicant. Ld. Counsel for the defendant stated that the applicant
who has filed the Notice of Motion is the same person who has filed
Written Statement for defendant. Therefore, it appears that applicant is
authorised to file the Notice of Motion.
5. Considering the circumstances of the case that on few dates
witness of the plaintiff was absent and after No Cross Order is passed
defendant has immediately appeared and filed Notice of Motion and
further the circumstances that defendant states that it was inadvertent
on their part due to which they did not remained present, it will be
proper to grant compensatory cost while allowing defendant to cross
examine the witness, to decide case on merits. Hence, following Order:
-- 2 of 4 --
:3: N.M. No.3400/2019 in Suit No.6559/2003
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.3400 of 2019 is allowed, subject to cost of
Rs.1500/ to be given by defendant to plaintiffs.
2. Notice of Motion No.3400 of 2019 stands disposed of.
(SONALI P. AGARWAL)
Adhoc Judge,
Date: 24.10.2019. City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 24.10.2019
Transcribed on : 24.10.2019
Signed on : 24.10.2019
-- 3 of 4 --
:4: N.M. No.3400/2019 in Suit No.6559/2003
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
24.10.2019 At 05:19 p.m. Mr. Subhash Sukhdeo Poul
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ Sonali P. Agarwal
(C.R.NO.14)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
24.10.2019
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 24.10.2019
Judgment/Order uploaded on 24.10.2019
-- 4 of 4 --