Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM 3683/2019 ..1.. In Disposed off SU No.2401/2015
CNR NO.MHCC010100302019
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY.
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3683 OF 2019
IN
DISPOSED L.C. SUIT NO. 2401 OF 2015
M/s. Shangi Food Products,
A Partnership firm though partners,
Shri Samir Rajkumar Shungloor, Aged : 52 Years,
Smt. Sudha Rajkumar Shungloor, Aged : 78 Years,
Having its Office at : M3, Mehra
Industrial Estate, Sakinaka,
Mumbai 400 072. ...Plaintiffs
Versus
The Asst. Engineer (B & F) "L" Ward,
Designated Officer "L2" Officer of the
Asst. Commissioner Mahanagarpalika,
1st Floor, L. Y. Market Building,
S. G. Barve Marg, Kurla (West)
Mumbai 400 070. ...Defendants
Appearance :
Mr. Shailesh Shukla, Advocate for Plaintiffs.
Mr. Giri, Advocate for defendant/MCGM.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI A. N. MARE (C.R.No.11)
DATE : 10th OCTOBER, 2019.
-- 1 of 4 --
NM 3683/2019 ..2.. In Disposed off SU No.2401/2015
O R A L O R D E R
1. Plaintiffs has taken out this Notice of Motion to set aside
dismissal of the suit and to restore the same on the ground that when the
suit was called on for hearing the plaintiff was out of station. Though,
his Advocate asked him to be ready to adduce evidence, he could not do,
so as original documents were not traceable. The adjournment sought
on 19.09.2019 was refused by this Court and the suit was dismissed for
want of prosecution. The plaintiff be given an opportunity to adduce the
evidence by setting aside the order of dismissal of the suit.
2. The defendant has opposed the Notice of Motion on the
ground that no sufficient cause is made out to restore the suit.
3. Peruse Record. Heard both the parties.
4. Proceedings indicate that the suit proceeded without written
statement of the defendant. On almost 4 to 5 occasions plaintiff has
sought adjournment. Ultimately on 19.09.2019 the adjournment was
refused and the suit is dismissed for want of prosecution.
5. The plaintiff's has come up with the case that the original
documents were not traceable and therefore evidence could not adduce.
6. Considering the reason, in the interest of justice the plaintiff
can be allowed to prosecute the suit, however on certain conditions.
This is so because of dismissal of suit on 19.09.2019 and immediately on
27.09.2019 present Notice of Motion is taken out. Therefore, in order to
afford an opportunity to plaintiff to prove his claim on merits, notice of
Motion can be allowed. Consequently, I pass following order.
-- 2 of 4 --
NM 3683/2019 ..3.. In Disposed off SU No.2401/2015
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.3683 of 2019 is made absolute.
2. The order dated 19.09.2019 dismissing the suit for want of
prosecution is set aside, subject to costs of Rs.5,000/ payable
to Defendant.
3. The suit is restored to it's original stage.
4. Plaintiff shall adduce the evidence on next date without fail.
(A. N. MARE)
Judge,
Date : 10.10.2019 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated On : 10.10.2019
Transcribed on : 10.10.2019
HHJ Signed on : 11.10.2019
-- 3 of 4 --
NM 3683/2019 ..4.. In Disposed off SU No.2401/2015
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE TIME STENOGRAPHER NAME
15.10.2019 5.12 p.m. Mahendrasing D. Patil (H.G. Steno)
Name of the Judge H.H.J. SHRI. A. N. MARE
(Court Room No. 11)
Date of pronouncement of Order 10.10.2019
Order signed by P.O. on 11.10.2019
Order uploaded on 15.10.2019
-- 4 of 4 --