Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: CNR No.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4968 OF 2019
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.13 OF 2019
Shri Vinod Shankar Rachha ] … Plaintiff
V/s.
1. Shri Ramchandra Rajaram Chilveri & Anr.] ... Defendants
Appearances :
Mr.Patel, Ld. Adv. for plaintiff.
Ms. Sarita V9ishwakarma, Ld. Adv. for defendant Nos.1 & 2.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI SHANKAR G.
BORLEPWAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATED : 8th January, 2020
ORAL ORDER
1. Defendant No.2 has taken out this Notice of Motion to
condone the delay in filing written statement on record.
2. Perused Notice of Motion, affidavit in support of Notice of
Motion and reply of the plaintiff. Heard both sides.
3. Following points arise for my determination. I record my
findings for the reasons mentioned below:
MHCC01-013574-2019
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM 4968/19 in
SC Suit 13/19
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Whether delay in filing written
statement can be condoned?
In the affirmative.
2. Whether written statement of
defendant no.2 can be taken on record?
In the affirmative.
3. What Order ? Notice of motion is
allowed.
REASONS
As to point Nos.1 to 3.
4. In brief, it is contention of defendant No.2 that copy of
plaint and compilation of documents are served upon defendant No.2
on 17.9.2019. Her Advocate filed Vakalatnama on 05.10.2019. Then
Presiding Officer of this Court orally granted time to file written
statement. Written Statement was prepared and defendant No.2 went
to affirm it before the Registrar. It came to know that there is delay in
filing written statement. The delay is not inordinate. Therefore, delay
be condoned.
5. In brief, it is contention of the plaintiff that defendant
prolonging the matter. Therefore, Notice of Motion be dismissed.
6. This is a Commercial Suit. Therefore, as per Order 8 Rule 1
of Civil Procedure Code the defendant No.2 can be permitted to file
written statement within 120 days from the date of service of writ of
summons. The said 120 days limit is outer limit. In fact defendant
No.2 should have filed written statement within 30 days from the date
of service of writ of summons. It is contention of the defendant No.2
that the then Presiding Officer has orally granted time to file written
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM 4968/19 in
SC Suit 13/19
statement. I do not agree with the said contention because Court
cannot pass oral order.
7. According to the defendant No.2 the copy of plaint and
compilation of the documents are served upon her on 17.9.2019. This
Notice of Motion is filed on 17.12.2017. There is delay, but it is not
inordinate. Therefore, delay can be condoned and written statement of
defendant No.2 can be taken on record. Hence, I record my findings to
point Nos.1 and 2 in the affirmative and point No.3 the Notice of
Motion is allowed as per final order. Hence following order:
ORDER
Notice of Motion 4968 of 2019 is allowed as under:
1. Delay in filing written statement of defendant no.2 is hereby
condoned.
2. Written statement of defendant no. 2 be read and recorded.
3. Cost in cause.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 08/01/2020 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 08/01/2020
Transcribed on : 13/01/2020
Signed on : 14/01/2020
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM 4968/19 in
SC Suit 13/19
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
14.01.2020 at 03.42 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI S. G.
BORLEPWAR
(COURT ROOM NO.20)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 08.01.2020
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 14.01.2020
Judgment/order uploaded on 14.01.2020
-- 4 of 4 --