Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.2009 OF 2019
IN
S.C.SUIT NO.7736 OF 2000
Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. ....Plaintiffs
V/s
1. Pidilite Industries Ltd.
2. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.
3. Tata Share Registry Ltd. ....Defendants
APPEARANCE:
Advocate Subhash Bane for plaintiff.
Advocate Urvi Shah for defendant no.2.
Advocate V.V.Kumble for defendant no.3.
CORAM : H. H. ADHOC JUDGE
SHRI MILIND A. BHOSALE
(COURT ROOM NO. 32)
DATE : 30th November, 2019
ORDER
Perused Chamber Summons @ affidavit and written reply
tendered by defendant nos. 2 and 3.
2. It is submitted by the plaintiff that he has taken out Chamber
Summons for amendment in the clause title by changing/deleting name
and address of the defendant no.3 i.e. from Tata Share Registry Ltd.
Army and Navy building, M.G.Road, Opp. Jahangir Art Gallery,
Mumbai400023 and by changing/adding new name and address of
defendant no.3 i.e. TSR Darashaw Ltd, the company incorporated under
the provision of companies Act1956 having its registered
Office at 610, Haji Musa Patrawala Industrial Estate, 20, Dr.E.Moses
-- 1 of 4 --
2
Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai400011 and allow the plaintiff to amend the
clause title of the plaint. It is further submitted by the plaintiff that
proposed amendment is formal in nature and if permitted no prejudice
is caused to the case of defendant and the name and address of
defendant no.3 has been changed subsequently. Therefore, it is
necessary to amend the title clause of plaint. Lastly, it is prayed that
Chamber summons may be allowed and plaintiff be permitted to amend
clause title of plaint.
3. Defendant no.2 tendered written reply and submitted that
discretion may be exercised and appropriate order may kindly be
passed.
4. Defendant no.3 also tendered written reply and contended that
there is no due diligence on the side of plaintiff. Defendant had
tendered written statement on 16.12.2008 trial is commenced and no
sufficient cause for delay and in prayer also. Lastly, it is pointed out that
Court can allow Chamber Summons imposing heavy cost.
5. I have heard Ld counsel for plaintiff, defendant nos.2 and 3 and
perused the record of Suit No.7736 of 2000. Admittedly, the suit is
pending since 2000 as rightly pointed out by advocate for defendant
no.3 that issues are framed and trial is commenced. According to record
the plaintiff has tendered affidavit in examination in chief on record
and accordingly the documents also marked as an exhibited documents.
However, plaintiff wants to amend clause title of plaint by
changing/deleting name of defendant no.3. Prima facie it is the
amendment is formal in nature. However, certain changes are arisen
subsequently to the name of defendant no.3 and therefore, I am of the
-- 2 of 4 --
3
opinion that if plaintiff permit to amend the clause title by
changing/deleting the name of defendant no.3 then no prejudice is
caused to defendant because the proposed amendment is formal in
nature. Hence, I proceed to pass following order
ORDER
1) Chamber Summons No. 2009/2019 is made absolute in prayer
clauses(a),(b) and (c).
2) Plaintiff is permitted to carry out amendment within 14 days
under O.VI R.18 of CPC.
3) Chamber Summons No.2009/2019 is disposed of in the above
said terms.
Date:30/11/2019 (Milind A.Bhosale)
AdHoc Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr.Bombay
Dictated on : 30/11/2019
Typed on :30/11/2019
H.H.J.Signed on :30/11/2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
30.11.2019 at 5.30 p.m. (Mrs.P.P.Khanvilkar)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) SHRI M.A.BHOSALE
(C.R. NO.32)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/
ORDER
30.11.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 30.11.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 30.11.2019
-- 3 of 4 --
4
-- 4 of 4 --