Interim Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3473 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO. 6793 OF 2004
MHCC010094832019
Bharat Aluminium Company Ltd ...Plaintiff
Versus
Maharashtra State Road Transport
Corporation ..Defendants
Appearance:
Advocates Mr. Sushant Yadav & Ganoo for the Plaintiff.
Advocate Ms. P.M.Bhansali for the Defendant.
CORAM: H.S. SATBHAI,
JUDGE, (C.R.NO. 59)
DATE : 01st September, 2021
ORDER
The Notice of Motion has been taken out by the plaintiff,
seeking to give clarity to the issues framed on 04.03.2009, particularly
to issue No.7. According to the plaintiff, there is need to frame
additional issues in respect of the claims made in the suit.
2. The N/M has been objected by the other side on the
premise that the suit is on the verge of decision. After advancing the
arguments by the parties, it will rise up for decision. The plaintiff is
unnecessarily causing obstacles in the decision of the suit.
3. Heard both. Perused the issues, N/M and proposed issues.
The plaintiff does not dispute the framing of issues Nos.1 to 6. It is
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM3473/19
concerning to only issue No.7, which according to the plaintiff needs to
be clarified in the light of proposed issue Nos.1 to 3 of the ScheduleI
given by the plaintiff. A perusal of the proposed issues, it appears that
the relief has been elaborated in detail. Basically, issue No.7 already
framed for the reliefs claimed in the suit is going to be discussed and
decided. It is that “whether the plaintiff is entitled for all that relief or
not ?”. But, the Advocate for the plaintiff made a statement that there
is no question of reopening of the suit and even if the issues are
modified/aided, the plaintiff is not going to lead any additional
evidence. In view of that statement made on behalf of the plaintiff, it
appears just to give clarity to the Issue No.7 and to replace the issues
No.7 as 7a to 7d as follows.:
7a Whether the plaintiff is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.5
lakhs from the defendant towards the installment of bank
guarantee in respect of RC 177/20001 ?
7b Whether the plaintiff is entitled to Rs.25,000/ being refund
of earnest money deposit ?
7c Whether the plaintiff entitled to total loan Rs.2,63,803/
towards the supplementary bill raised by the plaintiff ?
7d Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the reliefs claimed ?
4 There is need to modify and add in issue No.7. Hence,
following order is passed.
ORDER
1. NM No. 3493/2019 is allowed.
2. Issue No. 7 be deleted and replaced with Issue Nos. 7(a) to 7(d) as
above.
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM3473/19
3. Parties to take note.
4. Matter is kept for advancing final arguments by the parties on next
date.
5. N/M No. 3493/2019 is accordingly disposed off.
Dated : 01.09.2021 (H.S. SATBHAI)
Judge,
City Civil Court
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 01.09.2021
Transcribed on : 04.09.2021
Signed on : 09.09.2021
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM3473/19
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE & TIME : 09.09.2019 12.45 P.M.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : S.S.BATHE
Name of Judge (with Court Room No.) Shri H.S. Satbhai
(C.R.No. 59)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT /ORDER
01.09.2021
JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by P.O. on 09.09.2021
JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded on 09.09.2021
-- 4 of 4 --