Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 CS 2333-2019 in L.C. Suit No.4150-2013
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 2333 OF 2019
IN
L.C. SUIT NO.4150 OF 2013
Mr. Abdul Sayed Mohamed Gaus ] ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Mr. Rajesh Jain & Others ]…Defendants.
Appearance:
Ld. Advocate J.S Jamkhandi for Plaintiff.
Ld. Advocate S.P. Shrivastav for Defendants.
CORAM : V.G. RAGHUWANSHI
JUDGE, (C.R.NO.08)
DATE : 04/07/2023.
ORAL ORDER
1. By this chamber summons plaintiff prays to introduce
amendment in plaint. He desires to insert pleadings about
handing over possession of permanent alternate accommodation
to defendant No.5 on 18/11/2013. He also desires to add a
prayer that plaintiff is entitled to decree of possession of the suit
premises with keys thereof as permanent alternate
accommodation in lieu of old hut. He desires to add prayer that
court should direct defendant No.5 to hand over possession of the
suit premises with keys thereof to plaintiff as permanent alternate
accommodation in lieu of old hut. Plaintiff’s application is
supported by affidavit of daughter/Constituted Attorney Hasina
Gaus.
2. Defendant No.5 resisted this application by filing his reply. He
submits that chamber summons is illegal, false and frivolous. He
-- 1 of 4 --
2 CS 2333-2019 in L.C. Suit No.4150-2013
submits that plaintiff has filed L.C. Suit No.295 of 2013 before
this court and prayed for same relief. Notice of motion No.328 of
2013 was rejected on 02/08/2013. Later on plaintiff withdrew
L.C. Suit No.295 of 2013. Plaintiff suppressed information about
L.C.Suit No.295 of 2013 that the suit was relating to same
property and notice of motion was also with same prayer. He
submitted that draw of lottery took place on 19/09/2013 and he
is allotted flat No.513 on 5th floor, Shahid Nagar SRA Co-
operative Housing Society Ltd. Wadala (W), Mumbai in lieu of
suit premises. He took possession of said flat and he is residing
there with his family members. The defendant submits that he
came to reside in said premises in 1973. Since then he was
continuously residing in suit premises. Plaintiff left said premises
long back. At least much prior to 1985. Plaintiff was residing at
Vashi and thereafter shifted to address mentioned in the cause
title. Plaintiff is not entitled to get any benefit of SRA scheme.
3. The defendant further submits that he was residing in suit
premises with his family from 1973 and at the time of
redevelopment his name was entered in Annexure II. He handed
over possession of original hut to defendant No.1 for
redevelopment and the defendant No.1 entered into an
agreement dated 09/12/2004 with him to provide permanent
alternate accommodation in lieu of suit premises. Thereafter,
supplementary agreement was executed on 17/11/2008.
Therefore, it is clear that he was residing in original hut when
redevelopment scheme came into existence. Therefore, he is
entitled to get permanent alternate accommodation in lieu of
original hut. Plaintiff is aware of these facts. Therefore, chamber
summons is time barred and liable to be rejected. Plaintiff had
-- 2 of 4 --
3 CS 2333-2019 in L.C. Suit No.4150-2013
executed affidavit in his favour. This application is baseless and
false. Defendant prayed for rejecting this application.
4. In this case plaintiff desires to amend his plaint and bring some
subsequent events on record. He desires to bring information on
record that defendant No.1 handed over possession of permanent
alternate accommodation to defendant No.5 on 18/11/2013. He
wants to introduce prayers claiming possession of the suit
premises i.e. permanent alternate accommodation for himself
from defendant No.5.
5. Defendant resisted this application but he did not file any copy of
notice of motion as contended by him. The defendant denies all
contentions of the plaintiff and prays for rejecting the application.
6. Truthness of plaintiff’s contention can be decided only after
recording evidence of the parties. Proposed amendment does not
change nature of the suit. It will not prejudice defendant or trial
of the suit. Therefore, discretion is required to be exercised in
favour of applicant/plaintiff and hence, I pass following order:-
ORDER
1. Chamber summons No.2333 of 2019 is allowed.
2. Plaintiff to carryout necessary amendment within two weeks from
today.
3. Chamber summons No.2333 of 2019 is disposed off accordingly.
Date : 04/07/2023 (Shri. V.G. RAGHUWANSHI)
Judge
City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on :04/07/2023.
Transcribed on :05/07/2022.
Signed on :11/07/2023.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 CS 2333-2019 in L.C. Suit No.4150-2013
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
12/07/2023 Mrs. S.A. Shekade.
Name of the Judge (With Court room
no.)
SHRI V.G. RAGHUWANSHI (Court
Room No.08)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
04/07/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
11/07/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 12/07/2023
-- 4 of 4 --