Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 3795/19 - Suit 1289/19
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3795/2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.1289/2019
(CNR No. MHCC01-010267-2019)
Mr.Vijaykumar Budhiprakash Agarwal ...Plaintiff
Versus
Mr. Dnayndev Sambhaji Gaikwad and Anr. ...Defendants
Appearances :
Adv. Ms Neha Pandey for plaintiff.
Adv. Mr M.S. Singh for defendant no.1.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
Additional Judge
CR No. : 03
Date : 6.10.2021.
ORDER
1. The defendant no.1 has filed instant Notice of Motion
seeking condonation of 39 days' delay in filing WS. It is contended by
the defendant no.1 that, he has received suit summons on 21.6.2019.
On 24.6.2019, he has appeared in the court and as he is a layman and
not having knowledge of the court proceeding, therefore he has sought
time to engage an advocate.
2. It is contended by the defendant no.1 that, he is very poor
and suffering from financial crisis. Therefore, he could not engage an
advocate before 24.8.2019.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM 3795/19 - Suit 1289/19
3. On 24.8.2019, he contacted his advocate and handed over
all the papers and gave instructions to him. The advocate thereafter
prepared WS and it is ready. Thus, the delay of 39 days has been caused
for tendering the WS.
4. He contended that, due to poor economic condition, the
delay has been caused. It is neither intentional nor deliberate. Hence, it
may be condoned in the interest of justice.
5. The Motion is opposed by the advocate of the plaintiff
orally. I have heard both the sides. Perused Notice of Motion as well as
pleadings in the plaint.
6. The plaintiff alleged that, the defendant no.1 is running a
NGO known as "Samaj Seva Jankalyan Foundation" and through whom,
the defendant no.1 made a defamatory publication about quality of milk
products supplied by him. Therefore, he filed present suit for claiming
damages and permanent injunction against the defendants.
7. Admittedly, the suit summons was duly served upon the
defendant no.1 on 21.6.2019. The reasons cited by the defendant no.1
is lack of knowledge of the court proceeding as well as his poor
economic condition. I am of the view that, the aforesaid reasons are
sufficient to condone the delay. In the event the delay is not condoned,
the suit will be proceeded without defence of the defendant no.1, which
will certainly defeat statutory right of the defendant no.1 to defend the
suit. The inconvenience caused to the plaintiff can compensated by
awarding reasonable costs. Thus, I proceed to pass following order :
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM 3795/19 - Suit 1289/19
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 3795/2019 is hereby allowed, subject to
payment of costs of Rs.2,000/ by the defendant no.1 to the
plaintiff.
2. Upon payment of the aforesaid costs, delay of 39 days in filing
the WS be condoned and WS shall be taken on record.
3. Defendant to bear the costs of the Motion.
4. In view of above, the Notice of Motion is disposed off accordingly.
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Dated : 6.10.2021 Greater Bombay.
Dictated on : 6.10.2021
Typed on : 6.10.2021
Draft Submitted on : 6.10.2021
Signed on : 7.10.2021
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM 3795/19 - Suit 1289/19
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
7.10.2021, at 3.10 pm .. (Nitin V. Ubale)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Selection Gr. Stenographer (Gr.1)
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.3)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/ ORDER 6.10.2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 7.10.2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 7.10.2021
-- 4 of 4 --