Date: 22-10-2019
Business: Adv. Dilip G. Bagwe i/b Adv. Mayur Sonawane for plaintiff is present.
Adjourned to 07.11.2019 for Service and Reply to Ch/S.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 07-11-2019
Date: 07-11-2019
Business: Adv. Dilip Bagwe a/w Adv. Mayur Sonawane for plaintiff is present.
None present for defendant.
Adjourned to 21.11.2019 for Reply to Ch/s.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 21-11-2019
Date: 21-11-2019
Business: Adv. Mayur S. Sonavane for plaintiff is present.
Plaintiff tenders registered Chamber Summons No.1823/19.
None present for defendant and proposed defendant.
Adjourned to 06.12.2019 for Reply on Chamber Summons.
Later on
Adv. K. N. Kandekar for defendant/MHADA is present.
Copy of chamber summons served to advocate for defendant.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 06-12-2019
Date: 06-12-2019
Business: Adv. Mayur S. Sonawane a/w Adv. Dilip Bagawe for plaintiff is present.
None present for defendant.
Adjourned to 04.01.2020 for Ch/S Reply.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 04-01-2020
Date: 04-01-2020
Business: Adv. Mayur Sonavane for plaintiff is present.
None present for defendant.
Defendant has not filed any reply to chamber summons.
Plaintiff to file affidavit of service on respondent/proposed defendant.
Adjourned to 10.01.2020 for Reply and filing affidavit of service.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2020
Date: 10-01-2020
Business: Adv. Mayur Sonavane a/w Adv. Dilip Bagawe for plaintiff is present and filed affidavit of service regarding service of chamber summons to proposed defendant. TOR and marked as Exh.4.
It appears from affidavit of service that the State Bank of India, inspite of service did not appear.
Adv. B. N. Kandekar i/b Adv. K. N. Kandekar for defendant is present.
None present for proposed defendant.
Heard both the sides.
Order on Chamber Summons No.1823/19
It is contended on behalf of plaintiff that the defendant has taken objection in written statement contending that the State Bank of India is necessary party therefore the present Chamber Summons is taken out. Defendant submits to the order of the court.
It appears that the suit is filed for refund of security deposit for contesting the tender. Tender was not alloted to the plaintiff and even the security deposit was not refunded to the plaintiff. The defendant submits that it is bank who has to remit the amount on the person to whom the tender is not allotted and the State Bank of India has not remitted the amount to the plaintiff. In view of this fact, I think the presence of State Bank of India is necessary.
ORDER
1. The Chamber Summons No.1823/19 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) and (b).
2. Plaintiff to carry out the amendment till next date.
3. Copy of amended plaint be served to both the defendants.
Adjourned to 29.01.2020 for Compliance.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 10-01-2020
