Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 N/M 4601 / 2019
in SC 2483-11
MHCC010126242019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION No.4601/2019
CNR NO.MHCC010126242019
IN
SUIT NO. 2483/2011
M/s.Vinayak Ashish Coop.
Housing Society Ltd. ...Plaintiff.
Versus
1.M/s. Essar Enterprises and Ors. ...Defendants.
Adv.B.A. singh with Adv. R.D.Thorat for the plaintiff.
Adv. N.K. Tanna for the defendant no.1.
None for the defendants no.2 to 5
Adv. Kadam for defts.no.6 to 8.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. KISHORE M.JAISWAL
(C.R. NO.14)
DATE : 5th DAY OF MARCH, 2021
ORAL ORDER
This notice of motion is taken out by the defendant no.1
with a prayer that Court should appoint the Court Commissioner for
recording evidence of PW no.1 and other witness if any of the
plaintiff. Perused the notice of motion which is supported by an
-- 1 of 4 --
2 N/M 4601 / 2019
in SC 2483-11
affidavit being executed by the partner defendant no.1 by name Atul
H. Ramani. The main suit is old one. The plaintiff has strongly
opposed the notice of motion by filing reply on affidavit being
executed by the Hon. Secretary of plaintiff society Shri V. R.
Balkrishna Pillai. It is pertinent to note here that the said secretary
himself has filed an affidavit in lieu of examinationinchief vide PW1
which is on record at Exh.64. The matter is old one. The affidavit
evidence is already verified and the documents filed by the plaintiff
has already been exhibited and the matter is fixed for cross
examination.
2. At the very out set, in the midst of passing of this order,
advocate Shri N.K.Tanna has appeared and I also heard him.
Advocate for the defendant has submitted that this notice of motion is
preferred only for saving the time of the Court. Be, that as it may, the
witness who is present before the Court is a senior citizens and he has
submitted that he is comfortable only if the cross examination is
proceeded before the Court. Moreso, on behalf of the plaintiff, the
application is opposed and therefore the contents of para no.9 which
states that the Commissioner fees is to be born equally by plaintiff
and defendant also needs to be considered. Under these
circumstances, referring the matter to Court Commissioner would be
unnecessary burden of costs / fees upon the plaintiff. In the present
case the plaintiff is not agreed for the same. The another point which
is argued is that as there are voluminous documents and therefore
Commissioner be appointed. Again, I do not find any merits in the
said argument as the plaintiff has already filed his affidavit of
documents and the documents filed by him are already been
exhibited and it is the matter of record. Therefore, I am not in
-- 2 of 4 --
3 N/M 4601 / 2019
in SC 2483-11
agreement with the argument advanced by learned advocate for
defendant no.1 that only to save time the matter could be sent to
commissioner for recording cross examination of PW no.1. In fact,
convinent date and time can be fixed with consent and convenience
of the parties, advocates and the witnesses, so that, the case can be
disposed of at an earliest. Thus this application at this stage cannot be
considered. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 4601/19 stands dismissed.
2. No order as to costs.
(Kishore M. Jaiswal)
Judge, City Civil & Sessions
Date:.05.03.2021 Court, Gr.Mumbai (C.R.No.14)
Dictated on :05.03.2021
Transcribed on :05.03.2021
Signed on :05.03.2021
-- 3 of 4 --
4 N/M 4601 / 2019
in SC 2483-11
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE:06.03.2021 NAME OF STENOGRAPHER(G I)
Mrs. V. V. Mhatre
TIME: pm
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) HHJ Shri Kishore M. Jaiswal.
(Court Room No.14)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGEMENT/ORDER 05.03.2021
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 05.03.2021
JUDGEMENT/ORDER uploaded on 06.03.2021
-- 4 of 4 --