Date: 06-11-2019
Business: Adv. Sachin Choudhary for plaintiff present.
Adv. Rahul Tiwari for defendants present.
Plaintiff tendered registered chamber summons no. 1976/19. TOR.
Defendants filed reply to CS. TOR.
Heard Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant on chamber summons no. 1976/19.
Order on Chamber summons no. 1976/2019.
Heard. The Ld. counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff has tendered this Chamber Summons to bring on the record the facts as regard the subsequent transactions entered by the defendant in respect of the suit property. The Ld. counsel for the plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff had taken Chamber summons no. 1325/18 for amendment of plaint and the defendants filed reply dated 12.7.2018 wherein he stated that pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the defendants, on 26.11.2015, have transferred and sold the suit premises to one Santoshkumar Namvarsingh. He submitted that said transaction was pending the suit and is illegal transaction. The defendants have filed their reply and contended that the suit was filed in the year 2008. As the plaintiff failed to remove the office objection, the suit was dismissed. Thereafter as per agreement dated 26.11.2015 the defendant have sold the suit premises to Santoshkumar Namvarsingh, who is now in exclusive possession of the suit premises. The said fact was elaborated in the reply filed by the defendants to the NM tendered by the plaintiff for restoration of the suit. The plaintiff is filing the amendment after considerable delay.
The plaintiff might have got the knowledge of the transaction of the defendants with Santoshkumar Namvarsingh when the defendants have filed reply to the Notice of Motion 519/13. On perusal of the reply of the defendants to NM it appears that there is their statement that the defendants have sold and transferred and conveyed the suit premises to third person. The date and the name of the person to whom the premises has been sold is not reflected. Therefore it cannot be said that the plaintiff had complete knowledge of the said transaction. The plaintiff got the knowledge of the said transaction, as per the contention of the plaintiff, when the defendants had filed reply to the chamber summons no. 1325/18. The said statement of the plaintiff appears to be correct. In the matter the issues are framed on 4.7.2019. Affidavit of evidence has not been filed and therefor the chamber summons can be taken into consideration as the facts which plaintiff wants to bring on the record are the development during the pendency of the NM and the suit. Hence, it is expedient to pass following order.
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons no. 1976/19 is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a).
2. Plaintiff to carry out the necessary amendment within a period of 14 days from today.
3. Costs in the cause.
4. Chamber Summons is disposed of accordingly.
Nature Of Disposal: ALLOWED
Disposal Date: 06-11-2019