Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 N.M. No.4169 of 2019
CNR:MHCC01-011433-2019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL C0URT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION No.4169 OF 2019
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION No.1731 OF 2012
IN
L.C. SUIT No.1531 OF 2012
Mr. Mohd. Tarique Khan .. Plaintiff
V/s.
The Municipal Corporation
of Gr. Mumbai .. Defendant
Appearance:-
Adv. Girish Pawar for plaintiff.
Adv. Sachin Vajale for defendant/BMC
CORAM : HIS HONOUR ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI. R. S. ARADHYE
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR. BOMBAY
(C.R. No.05).
DATE : 29/03/2025.
ORDER
The present Notice of Motion is taken out by the plaintiff
for setting aside the dismissal order Dtd.16/09/2019 and thereby
restoration of Notice of Motion No.1731 of 2012.
2. I have gone through the affidavit in support of Notice of
Motion and say of defendant/MCGM filed below Motion itself.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 N.M. No.4169 of 2019
3. It is the case of plaintiff that from 13/09/2019 to
18/09/2019, he was out of Mumbai for his business work and
instructed his advocate to remain present in the Court for the hearing of
Notice of Motion. However, on the date of dismissal of Notice of Motion
i.e. 16/09/2019, as per the plaintiff, his advocate was also out of town
and could not remain present before the Court. Notice of Motion No.
1731 of 2012 is filed for temporary injunction against defendant/
MCGM and notice issued under Section 351 of the MMC Act 1888 is
under challenge. Therefore, taking into consideration the reason of
absence, relief claimed in the earlier Notice of Motion, there is no delay
in taking out the present Notice of Motion, so order Dtd.16/09/2019
may kindly be set aside and Notice of Motion No.1731 of 2012 be
restored to its original number.
4. On behalf of defendant/MCGM, it is contended that after
filing of the suit, plaintiff continuously remained absent and failed to
proceed with the matter. Thus, in view of reluctant attitude of the
plaintiff, Court has rightly dismissed the Notice of Motion, accordingly,
present Notice of Motion be dismissed with costs.
5. I have gone through the Roznama Dtd.16/09/2019 and
some prior dates from which it disclosed that on 16/09/2019 neither
plaintiff nor his advocate was present, so Court has dismissed the Notice
of Motion No.1731 of 2012 for want of prosecution. But, earlier on so
many dates, either plaintiff or his advocate was present and matter was
adjourned for hearing on Notice of Motion. Notice issued under Section
351 of the MMC Act 1888 is challenged by the plaintiff in this suit and
now asking for the temporary injunction against defendant/MCGM by
-- 2 of 4 --
3 N.M. No.4169 of 2019
the said Notice of Motion. Therefore, taking into consideration relief
claimed in the Notice of Motion No.1731 of 2012 and absence only on
the date of dismissal order as well as no delay in filing present Notice of
Motion, I think it that dismissal order Dtd.16/09/2019 deserves to be
set aside, but not without costs, so in the result, following order is
passed.
ORDER
1. Notice of motion No.4169 of 2019 is hereby allowed.
2. Plaintiff to deposit cost of Rs.2000/- to the office of DLSA
Mumbai on or before next date and after compliance of this direction,
Notice of motion No.1731/2012 be restored to it’s original number.
3. Notice of motion is accordingly disposed of
Date: 29/03/2025. (R. S. Aradhye)
Dictated on :29/03/2025. Judge, City Civil Court,
Typed on :01/04/2025. Gr.Mumbai.
Signed on :02/04/2025.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 N.M. No.4169 of 2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
02/04/2025. 01.52 p.m. (Santosh B. Sawant )
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court room
No.)
HHJ Shri. R. S. Aradhye
(C.R.No.05)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
29/03/2025.
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.on 02/04/2025.
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 02/04/2025.
-- 4 of 4 --