Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: MHCC010114862019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT 8
IN
SUMMARY SUIT NO.51 OF 2021
Vikrant Sabne and Associates ....Plaintiff.
V/s.
M/s. Neo Growth Credit Private Limited
and Ors.
....Defendants.
Appearances:
Ld. Adv. D'mello for plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Sujit Nikam for defendant.
CORAM : HER HONOUR JUDGE
SMT. R.K. KSHIRSAGAR
(C.R.No.13)
DATED : 2nd August, 2022
O R D E R
1. The present application is filed by the defendant seeking
permission to file additional affidavit in reply to the Summons of
Judgment.
-- 1 of 4 --
O.B. Exh – 8 in Suit 51 of 2021 .. 2 ..
2. It was submitted by the defendants that the plaintiff had
earlier filed a Commercial Suit. The defendants had filed their written
Statement. Later on, the Commercial Suit was converted into the
present Summary Suit. The earlier Advocate adopted the written
statement in the Commercial Suit as a reply to the Summons for
Judgment without consent of the defendants. The defendants came to
know about the same afterwards. The defendants now wants to bring
certain facts and documents which are not mentioned in the written
statement. And therefore, they intend to file additional affidavit in
reply.
3. The plaintiff gave say and denied the maintainability of the
present application. It was submitted that there is no provision to file
additional reply to the Summons for Judgment in the Summary Suit.
Also there is no provision to adopt the written statement as the reply
and therefore the application be dismissed.
4. Heard the Learned Advocate for both the sides.
5. Admittedly, the suit was filed as Commercial Suit and later
on it was assigned to this Court. The defendants had already filed their
written statement in the Commercial Suit. The plaintiff has taken out
this Summons for Judgment and as per the submission of the defendant
dated 27.10.2021 the written statement of the defendants before the
Commercial Court was treated as their reply to the Summons for
Judgment. The Learned Advocate for plaintiff had not raised any
objection at that point of time. Subsequently, the defendant changed
their Advocate and the defendant wants to file additional affidavit in
reply for bringing certain facts on record. It seems that considering the
-- 2 of 4 --
O.B. Exh – 8 in Suit 51 of 2021 .. 3 ..
peculiar facts of the matter and in order to decide the matter in
controversy on merits it would be appropriate to grant an opportunity
to defendants to file their additional reply to the Summons for
Judgment. Till date the Summons for Judgment is not argued and
therefore, no prejudice and harm will cause to the plaintiff, if the
application is allowed. On the other hand, if the defendant is not
allowed to file additional reply, the defendant will suffer irreperable
loss and therefore, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
1. Application Exh.08 is allowed.
2. Parties to bear their own costs.
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
Dt.: 02/08/2022 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 02082022
Transcribed on : 02082022
checked on : 02082022
Signed on : 03082022
( Smt. R. K. Kshirsagar )
Judge, (C.R.No.13)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 3 of 4 --
O.B. Exh – 8 in Suit 51 of 2021 .. 4 ..
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
03.08.2022 at 02.10 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME (VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge H.H.J.Smt.R.K.Kshirsagar
(COURT ROOM NO.13)
Date of pronouncement of
judgment/order
02.08.2022
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 03.08.2022
Judgment/order uploaded on 03.08.2022
-- 4 of 4 --