Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 C/S 2331/19(Suit 1131/14)
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.2331/2019
(CNR No. MHCC010135192019)
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 1131/2014
Mrs. Aminabee Saeed Khan ..Plaintiff
V/s.
Mr. Firoz Khan Sarvar Khan ..Defendant.
AND
Mr. Sandeep Mandavkar
Mrs. Sandeep Mandavkar. .. Respondents.
Appearances :
Adv. Nikita Bhavsar for plaintiff.
Adv. Sakshi Agarwal h/f. Bipin Joshi for defendant.
Coram : His Honour Judge
Shri. A.H.Laddhad
CR No.:03.
Date : 17.2.2022.
ORDER
1. Plaintiff filed instant chamber summons seeking permission
to add proposed defendants as party to the suit.
2. It is contention of the plaintiff that, as defendants, during
pendency of the trial and inspite of having injunction order, transferred
the suit premises to the proposed defendants. Therefore, the plaintiff is
seeking them to be added in the suit.
3. Ld Advocate for the defendants opposed the chamber
summons on the ground that, the proposed defendants are not
necessary parties as the suit is for partition. Hence, she prayed for
dismissal of the chamber summons.
4. I have heard both the sides. Perused chamber summons,
reply and pleadings in the plaint. The plaintiff filed instant suit seeking
partition and share in the suit premises. Admittedly, my Predecessor
-- 1 of 3 --
2 C/S 2331/19(Suit 1131/14)
granted injunction against the defendants, not to create third party
interest. It is allegation of the plaintiff that, the defendants parted with
the possession and created third party interest in favour of the proposed
defendants. Therefore, she filed Contempt Notice of Motion
No.635/2016. The plaintiff also served notice of that contempt to the
proposed defendants. They have also filed reply, wherein they have
made it clear that they have entered into an agreement with the
defendants and they have paid Rs.20 Lakh to the defendants. However,
my Predecessor vide order dated 21.8.2019, deferred findings on the
contempt Motion till the end of trial on the ground that, the plaintiff
failed to produce documents of transfer.
5. No doubt, aforesaid material clearly shows that, the
defendants already created third party interest in the suit premises; that
may be a fact but looking to the nature of the suit, I am of the view that
the proposed defendants are neither necessary nor proper parties to the
suit. Hence, chamber summons cannot be allowed. Thus, I proceed to
pass following order :
ORDER
1. Chamber Summons no.2331/2019 is rejected.
2. No order as to costs.
3. Chamber summons is disposed off accordingly.
(A.H.Laddhad)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Dated : 17.2.2022 Greater Bombay (CR03)
Dictated on : 17.2.2022
Typed on : 17.2.2022
Signed on : 18.2.2022
-- 2 of 3 --
3 C/S 2331/19(Suit 1131/14)
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
18.2.2022 at 3.55 pm (Nitin V. Ubale)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Selection Gr. Stenographer(Gr.1)
Name of the Judge (With Court room no.) Shri A.H.LADDHAD
(C.R. No.3)
Date of Pronouncement of JUDGMENT/ ORDER 17.2.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on 18.2.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 18.2.2022
-- 3 of 3 --