Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: NM 4907-19 in S.C.Suit no.2482-19
1 Date :18.01.2020
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4907 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 2482 OF 2019
(CNR MHCC010134002019 )
Priti Prashant Jadhav .. Plaintiff
Versus
Anusaya Sahebrao Jadhav .. Defendant
Appearances :
Adv.Pravin Sawant for plaintiff.
Adv.Vacan Bodke a/w Pinky Sharma i/b V and M Legal for
defendant.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
Judge
CR No. : 07
Date : 18.01.2020
ORDER
1. The defendant filed instant Notice of Motion for condonation
of 62 days delay in filing Written Statement and permission to file
the same on record.
2. It is contended by the defendant that she has been served on
04.09.2019 with the notice of Advocate in respect of Notice of
Motion seeking urgent relief. However, due to heavy rain she
could not remain present for the matter. Thereafter, she was not
keeping good health. Thereafter, in the month of September, 2019
she approached her advocate. The advocate gave her advice after
verifying the status from the Web site that she has to file reply on
01.10.2019 to the Notice of Motion filed by the plaintiff. On
-- 1 of 4 --
NM 4907-19 in S.C.Suit no.2482-19
2 Date :18.01.2020
01.10.2019, she has appeared through her advocate and sought
time to file reply to the Notice of Motion.
3. It is further contended by the defendant that her advocate
asked her to search about the receipt of Writ of Summons, but, she
could not understood the same. However, upon due search, she
found Summons copy, which was received by her on 19.09.2019.
The aforesaid summons copy were handed over by her to her
advocate, whereupon, her advocate informed that there is a delay
in filing Written Statement. Thus, due to aforesaid reason, delay
of 62 days has been caused in filing Written Statement. The
defendant contended that delay is unintentional. If delay is not
condoned and if she is not allowed to file her Written Statement, a
great prejudice would cause to her right to defend the suit. Hence,
defendant prayed for allowing Notice of Motion.
4. The Notice of Motion is opposed by the plaintiff by filing her
say. It is contended by the plaintiff that there is no sufficient and
bonafide reasons assigned by the defendant to condone the delay.
Hence, plaintiff prayed for rejection of Notice of Motion.
5. Heard both the sides. Perused Notice of Motion and reply. It
is not in dispute that the defendant is senior citizen having age of
72 years. On perusal of the case papers, it appears that there is a
dispute between plaintiff and defendant after death of son of
defendant. The plaintiff is the daughterinlaw of defendant. The
reasons assigned by the defendant to condone the delay is that she
-- 2 of 4 --
NM 4907-19 in S.C.Suit no.2482-19
3 Date :18.01.2020
could not understand the importance of service of summons.
Looking to the fact that defendant is 72 years old lady and she is
interested in defending the matter, in my view, reasons assigned
by her is sufficient to condone the delay. Moreover, taking hyper
technical view could not be justified in dispersing with the justice.
In the event, delay is not condoned, certainly right of defendant to
contest the suit would be curtailed. Hence, in my view, present
Notice of Motion needs to be allowed. The inconvenience caused
to the plaintiff can be compensated by awarding reasonable cost of
Rs. 2,000/ payable by the defendant to the plaintiff. Thus, I
proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No. 4907 of 2019 is hereby allowed in
terms of prayer clause (a), (b) and (c) subject to the
condition of payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/ to plaintiff. After
payment of aforesaid cost, Written Statement be taken on
record.
2. Defendant to bear cost of Notice of Motion.
3. Notice of Motion No. 4907 of 2019 is disposed off
accordingly.
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Dated : 18.01.2020 Greater Bombay.
Dictated on : 18.01.2020
Typed on : 18.01.2020
Draft Submitted on : 18.01.2020
Checked on : 21.01.2020
Signed on : 21.01.2020
-- 3 of 4 --
NM 4907-19 in S.C.Suit no.2482-19
4 Date :18.01.2020
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
24/01/2020 at 5.00 p.m. (Ms. V.V.Sawant)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court room
no.)
Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.7)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ ORDER
18/01/2020
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
21/01/2020
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 24/01/2020
-- 4 of 4 --