Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1
Ch/sum. no.1868-19; In Suit no. 3722 of 2008
(H.Ct suit no. 1176-08)
MHCC010105942019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1868 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO.3722 of 2008
(HIGH COURT SUIT NO. 1176 OF 2008)
Iqbal Imam Khan (Since deceased)
Noor Iqbal Khan and Others. ..Plaintiffs
V/s
Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited
Company and Others ..Defendants.
A N D
Abub Iqbal Khan and Others ...Applicants /
Plaintiffs 4 to 8.
A N D
Salma Noor Khan and Others … Applicants/
Proposed Plaintiffs.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI VIRENDRA D. KEDAR
(COURT ROOM NO.01)
DATE :17th DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
: Appearances:
Adv. Akhilesh Yadav for proposed plaintiff.
Adv. Bhatiya for defendants.
-- 1 of 5 --
2
Ch/sum. no.1868-19; In Suit no. 3722 of 2008
(H.Ct suit no. 1176-08)
ORAL ORDER
The present chamber summons has been taken out by the
applicants /proposed plaintiffs for condonation of delay and to bring
themselves on record as the legal heirs of deceased plaintiff no.2
Noor Iqbal Khan.
2. In short, it is contention of applicants that, the plaintiffs
have filed suit for specific performance of agreement against
defendants. During pendency of the suit, plaintiff no.2 Noor Iqbal
Khan died on 10.04.2017. Applicant no.1 Salma Noor Khan is the
widow and applicant no.2 Noman and applicant no.3 Noha are son
and daughter of the deceased plaintiff no.2 respectively. They do not
know about the pending of the suit. For the first time on 23rd October,
2017 they came to know about the present suit when their advocate
had met to them.
3. It is further contention of applicants that, delay of 180
days has been caused to bring themselves on record as legal heirs of
the deceased plaintiff no.2 Noor Khan. Delay is not intentional. It is
bonafide one. Hence, same may kindly be condoned and the chamber
summons may kindly be allowed.
4. Defendant no.1 strongly opposed the chamber summon
by filing reply on affidavit. It is contended that the chamber summons
is barred by limitation. No sufficient cause has been shown for
condoning the delay. The chamber summons being devoid of
substance and merits is liable to be rejected with costs.
5. Heard the learned advocate for the applicants and
learned advocate for defendant no.1. Perused the record.
-- 2 of 5 --
3
Ch/sum. no.1868-19; In Suit no. 3722 of 2008
(H.Ct suit no. 1176-08)
6. Following points are arise for my determination to which
I have recorded my findings with reasons as follows:
Sr.No. Points Findings.
1. Whether the applicants have made out
case for reliefs as claimed in the
chamber summons ?
Yes
2. What order ? As per final order.
REASONS
As to point no.1:
7. It is main contention of applicants / proposed plaintiffs
that during pendency of the suit, plaintiff no.2 died on 10.04.2017. In
support of their contention they have filed photocopy of death
certificate of plaintiff no.2 Noor Khan. Upon perusal of the same, it
reveals that it was issued by Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai wherein it reveals that plaintiff no.2 Noor Khan died on
10.04.2017. Applicants are legal heirs of the deceased. They have
right to sue and to be sued survived in their favour. It is contended
that as plaintiff no.2 was looking after proceeding hence applicants
are unaware about the same.
8. It is to be seen that, applicant no.1 is the widow and
applicants no. 2 and 3 are minors children of the deceased Noor
Khan. It is submitted that, after they met to their advocate, they came
to know about the present proceedings. Hence, the delay of 180 days
has been caused in filing the chamber summon for bringing
themselves on record. Applicants have shown substantial interest in
the matter. Thus I am of the view that applicants have duly
-- 3 of 5 --
4
Ch/sum. no.1868-19; In Suit no. 3722 of 2008
(H.Ct suit no. 1176-08)
explained the sufficient reason for condoning the delay. If the
chamber summons is allowed by imposing some cost, then it will
subserve the purpose. Hence , my answer to point no.1 is in
affirmative.
As to point no.2:
9. In view of my above discussion, I pass the following
order.
ORDER
Chamber summons no.1868/2019 is allowed by
condoning the delay of 180 days, subject to payment of cost of
Rs.1000/ to be paid by applicants to the defendant no.1.
Applicants be taken on record as plaintiffs no.2(a) to
2(c).
Plaintiff is directed to carry out the necessary
amendment within 14 days.
Chamber summons is disposed of accordingly.
(Virendra D. Kedar)
Judge, City Civil & Sessions
Court,Gr.Mumbai
Date:.17.08.2022 (C.R. No.1)
Dictated on : 17.08.2022
Transcribed on : 18.08.2022
Signed on :
-- 4 of 5 --
5
Ch/sum. no.1868-19; In Suit no. 3722 of 2008
(H.Ct suit no. 1176-08)
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE 19.08..2022 NAME OF STENOGRAPHER(GI)
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 17.08.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 19.08.2022
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 19.08.2022
-- 5 of 5 --