Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 Ord. in NM no 3867 OF 2019 In Suit no.1431 of 2017
MHCC010105432019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT, AT BOMBAY
ORDER IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3867 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO.1431 of 2017
M/s Navkar Wealth Services Pvt Ltd. .... Plaintiff
V/s
1. UTI Infrastructure Technology and
Services Limited & Anr. …. Defendants.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI VIRENDRA D. KEDAR
(COURT ROOM NO.01)
DATE : 7th DAY OF JUNE, 2023
-: Appearances: -
The learned Adv. Asad Bhukhari for plaintiff.
The learned Adv. Sakit Jain I/b P and A Law Offices for the defendants.
ORAL ORDER
The plaintiff has taken out present notice of motion for
discarding written statement of defendants no.1 and 2 dated
06/03/2019.
2. Briefly stated:
It is contention of the plaintiff that, the plaintiff has entered
into an agreement dated 10/01/2012 to purchase suit premises with
-- 1 of 5 --
2 Ord. in NM no 3867 OF 2019 In Suit no.1431 of 2017
defendant no.1. However defendant arbitrarily in contravention of
provision of law and in gross violation of principal of natural justice
terminated the contract entered with the plaintiff for sale of suit
premises. Therefore, the plaintiff has filed suit before Civil Judge Senior
Division at Rajkot bearing Regular suit no. 195/2013. However, it came
to return to present before City Civil Court at Mumbai. Accordingly, it
came to be filed in this Court.
3. It is further contention of the plaintiff that, the plaintiff has
already serve the copy of plaint with documents on defendants in the
Rajkot as well as City Civil Court. However, defendants failed to file
their written statement within stipulated time as per law. On
20/06/2018, this Court has granted last chance to the defendants for
filing written statement. However, defendants failed to file the same.
On 27/09/2018, this Court was pleased to adjourn the matter and kept
it on 09/01/2019 for passing No W.S., order, but on that date also the
defendants have not have filed their written statement and surprisingly
on 06/03/2019 defendants have filed their written statement without
seeking leave of the Court and suppressing the facts. Therefore, on this
count, the written statement filed by the defendants required to be
discarded. Hence, the notice of motion.
4. Defendants strongly opposed the notice of motion by filing
reply on affidavit. Defendants denied all the adverse allegations and
contentions in the notice of motion. It is submitted that, on 09/01/2019
as the Court was not sitting, hence the written statement could not be
filed. However, on 06/03/2019 defendants have filed their written
statement and its copy was also given to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has
not raised any objection at that time. Therefore, the plaintiff is now
-- 2 of 5 --
3 Ord. in NM no 3867 OF 2019 In Suit no.1431 of 2017
estopped from raising the objection. The notice of motion being devoid
of substance and merits is liable to be rejected.
5. Heard both the learned advocates for respective parties at
length and perused the record.
6. Following points arise for my determination to which I have
recorded my findings with reasons as follows:
Sr. No. Points Determination
1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for
the reliefs claimed in the notice of
motion?
No
2. What order? As per final order.
REASONS
As to Points no.1: -
7. After hearing both the parties at length, I have gone
through the record, particularly the Roznama. It is main grievances of
the plaintiff that defendants have filed their written statement by
suppressing material fact and behind back of the plaintiff, without
seeking any leave of the Court. I have perused the roznama dated
20/08/2018 wherein it reveals that defendants appears through
advocate Mr. Shetty and filed vakalatnama (Exh.4). They have sought
time to file reply to notice of motion and written statement which is
granted as a last chance. On 06/08/2018 defendants have filed reply to
notice of motion and the matter is adjourned by consent on
27/09/2018. On 27/09/2018 the matter is adjourned for passing No
W.S. order. On 09/01/2019 the matter is adjourned for hearing on
notice of motion. It is pertinent to note that on all above dates, the
plaintiff through representative and advocate is present before the
-- 3 of 5 --
4 Ord. in NM no 3867 OF 2019 In Suit no.1431 of 2017
Court. Roznama dated 06/03/2019 shown that, defendants no. 1 and 2
filed their written statement (Exh.6). It reveals that, at that time the
plaintiff is present before the Court and he has accepted copy of written
statement without any objection. On 26/04/2019 none present for the
plaintiff. On 29/07/2019 advocate Bhatiya for plaintiff is present and
sought time for argument in notice of motion. Thus, from the perusal of
record, it reveals that my learned predecessor in Court has granted
permission to the defendant to file their written statement on record.
The plaintiff has also accepted the written statement without raising
any objection. Thus, in my view, now the defendants at belated stage
cannot raise such objection. I do not found any reasons to discard the
written statement of defendants. Hence, no case made out by the
plaintiff for the reliefs sought. Therefore my answer to point no.1 is in
negative.
As to point no.2:
8. In view of my above discussion, I pass the following order:
ORDER
Notice of motion No.3867/2019 is hereby stands rejected.
Notice of motion is disposed of accordingly.
(Virendra D. Kedar)
Judge, City Civil & Sessions
Court, Gr. Mumbai
Date:.07.06.2023 (C.R. No.1)
Dictated on : 07.06.2023
Transcribed on : 08.06.2023
Checked & Signed on : 08.06.2023
-- 4 of 5 --
5 Ord. in NM no 3867 OF 2019 In Suit no.1431 of 2017
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE 09.06.2023 NAME OF STENOGRAPHER(G-I)
Mrs. V. V. Mhatre
TIME:
Name of the Judge (With Court
room no.)
HHJ Shri Virendra D. Kedar
(Court Room No.1)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
07.06.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
08.06.2023
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
09.06.2023
-- 5 of 5 --