Skip to main content
Court Order

Final Order 1

CNR MHCC01013584201904 Jan 2025
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Final Order 1 · 04 Jan 2025 · CNR MHCC010135842019

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: C/S. No.2342/19 (SC No.2022/19)
MHCC010135842019
Presented on : 27/12/2019
Registered on : 27/12/2019
Decided on : 04/01/2025
Duration : - Y 5 M 9 D
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER MUMBAI
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.2342 OF 2019
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO. 2022 OF 2019
M/s. Sukanksha Constructions ... Plaintiff
- Versus -
Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. … Defendant
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. PRASHANT C. KALE
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR. BOMBAY
(C. R. NO.65)
DATE : 04th January, 2025.
Appearance :-
Mr. R. Y Sapre, Advocate for plaintiff.
Mr. Advaid Patel, Advocate for defendant.
O R D E R
By this chamber summons the plaintiff has prayed for
amendment in pleadings as per the provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of
the Code of Civil Procedure. Perused affidavit in support, reply filed by
defendant and the suit proceeding.
Page 1 of 3
-- 1 of 4 --
C/S. No.2342/19 (SC No.2022/19)
2. It is submitted by the plaintiff that he has filed suit for
declaration that forfeiture of bank guarantee issued by IDBI Bank Ltd. is
illegal. During the pendancy of the suit, defendant has revoked the bank
guarantee and accordingly an amount of Rs.4,85,000/-is transferred in
the account of defendant on 20.08.2019. The revocation of the bank
guarantee is void and has caused financial loss to the plaintiff. Plaintiff
is entitled to recover of the said amount of Rs.4,85,000/- from the
defendant and therefore it has become necessary to amend the plaint in
view of the subsequent events. The defendant has not filed its written
statement and therefore no prejudice will be caused to the defendant if
amendment is allowed. Hence, this chamber summons.
3. The defendant has filed reply and opposed the chamber
summons. It is submitted by defendant that the plaintiff is attempting to
change the nature of the suit and by virtue of the present amendment,
prayer of recovery is sought by the plaintiff. Defendant further
submitted that it has filed written statement and reply to the notice of
motion. Thus, prayed for dismissal of the chamber summons.
4. Heard both the parties. The plaintiff and defendant have
filed written notes of arguments. The defendant argued on merit of suit
in its written notes of arguments. It is settled principle that while
dealing with the amendment application, the merits of the suit cannot
be looked into. Record reflects that the trial is yet to began in this suit
and the amendment sought by the plaintiff is consequential in nature as
he has sought declaration in respect of forfeiture of the bank guarantee.
As per the affidavit of the plaintiff the defendant has revoked the bank
Page 2 of 3
-- 2 of 4 --
C/S. No.2342/19 (SC No.2022/19)
guarantee and now during the pendancy of the suit, it is become
necessary for him to bring the subsequent events. Prima facie the
contentions of the plaintiff are in view of the subsequent events. In my
opinion, the proposed amendment would not change the nature of the
suit claim. Incorporation of facts by way of proposed amendment is
necessary for deciding the real controversy between the parties. I am on
the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil
Procedure. At this stage, I am not allowed to touch the merits of the
suit. Appreciating the relevant considerations of law with the nature of
proposed amendment, the same is necessary for adjudication of the
dispute on merit and same deserves to be allowed in the interest of
justice. Hence following order:-
ORDER
1. Chamber summons No.2342/2019 in Suit No.2022/2019 is
allowed as prayed.
2. Plaintiff to carry out necessary amendment on or before
next date
3. Parties to take note.
4. Proceeding of chamber summons No.2342/2019 in Suit
No.2022/2019 is closed.
Date : 04/01/2025. (Prashant C. Kale )
Ad-hoc Judge
City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Page 3 of 3
-- 3 of 4 --
C/S. No.2342/19 (SC No.2022/19)
Dictated on : 04.01.2025
Typed on : 04.01.2025
Checked on : 04.01.2025
Re-typed on : 06.01.2025
Signed on : 06.01.2025
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
07.01.2025 at 5.20 pm ( Samruddhi Jadhav)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
room No.)
HHJ Shri. Prashant C. Kale (C.R.No.65)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
04/01/2025
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
06/01/2025
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 07/01/2025
Page 4 of 3
-- 4 of 4 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.