Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: CNR No.MHCC01-012633-2019. .1. CH/S. No. 2180/2019 in
L.C. Suit No. 2995/2019.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 2180 OF 2019.
IN
L.C. SUIT NO. 2995 OF 2019.
Sarvanan Shankar Nadar. ……………...……….. …. PLAINTIFF.
V/s.
MCGM. ….………...……………………………… .… DEFENDANT.
M/s. Skyways Developers. …..………………….. …. APPLICANT.
CORAM : Shri. A.G. Santani.
(Court Room No.11).
DATED : 1st August, 2023.
APPEARANCES :
Mr. Tariq Choudhari, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiffs.
Mr. Ulhas Naik, Ld. Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. G.O. Giri, Ld. Advocate for the Defendant/MCGM.
*****
01. The applicant - M/s. Skyways Developers has taken out this
Chamber Summons (for brevity ‘the Ch/s.’), U/O. I Rule 10 of the Civil
Procedure Code, 1908, for his addition as 'party defendant No. 2' in the
suit and for directing the plaintiff to carry out the required amendment.
Perused the Ch/s., accompanying affidavit of Mr. Shekharan Raju, C.A.
of the applicant, the plaintiff’s reply and the defendant’s say. Also gone
through the written submissions of the applicant filed on his Ch/s.. The
plaintiff adopted his reply as his submissions on the Ch/s., by filing his
pursis at Exhibit 7. Heard.
02. Considering the record, the points for determination, along-
with my findings and the reasons therefor, are as under :
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
(i). Whether the applicant's presence is
-- 1 of 5 --
CNR No.MHCC01-012633-2019. .2. CH/S. No. 2180/2019 in
L.C. Suit No. 2995/2019.
necessary in order to enable this Court
effectually and completely to adjudicate
upon and settle the questions involved
in the suit ?....…..................................... ....Yes.
(ii). What Order ? .............…....................... … As per final Order.
-: REASONS FOR THE FINDINGS :-
AS TO POINT NO.1 :
03. By filing this Ch/s., the applicant came with a specific case
that by virtue of the Conveyance Deed of dtd. 23.06.2011, he purchased
the land admeasuring 226.40 sq. meters, bearing Survey No. 45, Hissa
No. 3, corresponding C.T.S. No. 176 of Village Saki (Mohili), Tal. Kurla,
Mumbai Suburban District. Since, this purchase till September, 2018, he
enjoyed the property peacefully. Later, the plaintiff and one Nityanand
Shankar, by posing themselves as tenants of Mr. Linus D’Souza i.e. one
of the vendors of applicant, demolished existing structure and started to
carry out the illegal construction of ground plus first floor structure. As
such, on 04.10.2018 and on 13.11.2018, he lodged complaints with the
defendant for taking appropriate steps. Further, he secured information
under the RTI Act. On his report, the defendant initiated this action and
he is also owner of the property. Therefore, his presence is necessary for
the effectual decision of the suit issues. Contrarily, the plaintiff resisted
the Ch/s. as the applicant suppressed the material facts. He is in a habit
to use the Court machinery to settle his personal score. Even description
of the property, referred in the documents filed by him is different. That
apart, even assuming him as a landlord, as he has independent right to
file a separate proceeding, he is not required in this suit. Whereas, the
defendant submitted to Orders of this Court.
04. Considering the rival stands, it is worth to be noted that the
-- 2 of 5 --
CNR No.MHCC01-012633-2019. .3. CH/S. No. 2180/2019 in
L.C. Suit No. 2995/2019.
plaint averments do not make full disclosure of the facts. Firstly, the suit
premises is not ‘properly described’ by referring its CTS number, etc.. In
Para 4 of the plaint, the plaintiff contended that on the false complaints
of some persons, the defendant initiated this action. More so, again, he
did not disclose ‘their names’. However, the fact remained that P.R. Card
and 7/12 extract, filed with the plaint compilation, do bear the name of
the said Mr. Linus D’Souza. Whereas, this applicant, prima facie, proved
his contentions in Ch/s. in the light of the registered Conveyance Deed,
bearing his name as owner of the said land. He also placed 7/12 extract
and P.R. Card, having name of the said Linus. Simultaneously, he placed
the copies of complaints, lodged against the alleged construction carried
by the plaintiff. However, as compared to this record, the plaintiff could
give an evasive reply, denying the applicant’s contentions. Therefore, it
can safely be inferred that barring his bare denial, he has nothing to say
on this Ch/s.. On this backdrop, I am of the opinion that presence of the
applicant, being owner of the property, is necessary for the just decision
of this suit. Further, passing of any Orders, in his absence, may affect his
such interest. This way, he is a necessary party to the suit and therefore,
this Ch/s. deserves to be allowed. Hence, I answered point No.1 in the
affirmative and to answer point No. 2, I pass the following Order :
-: O R D E R :-
(i). Chamber Summons No. 2180/2019 is made absolute in
terms of prayer clause (a) and (b) only. Consequently, the
plaintiff is called upon to carry out the necessary
amendment /addition of the applicant as the party
defendant No. 2 in the plaint and to file the copy of
amended plaint simultaneously. The plaintiff is further
called upon to supply the copy of pleadings on this newly
added defendant till the next date.
-- 3 of 5 --
CNR No.MHCC01-012633-2019. .4. CH/S. No. 2180/2019 in
L.C. Suit No. 2995/2019.
(ii). Chamber Summons No.2180 /2019 is, accordingly,
disposed of.
{A.G. Santani}
Mumbai. Judge
Dated : 01.08.2023. City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 01.08.2023.
Transcribed on : 05.07.2023.
Checked and Signed on : 07.07.2023.
-- 4 of 5 --
CNR No.MHCC01-012633-2019. .5. CH/S. No. 2180/2019 in
L.C. Suit No. 2995/2019.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
08.08.2023 at 5.26 p.m.
Name of the Stenographer
Mrs. S.R.Mejari
Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.) HHJ Shri A.G.Santani
(Court Room No.11).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 01.08.2023.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 07.08.2023.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 08.08.2023.
-- 5 of 5 --