Interim Order 2

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
( BANDRA BRANCH)
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT - 19
IN
R. A. E. SUIT NO. 324 OF 2022
(CNR-MHSCA-30006702022)
Miss. Indira Vasanji Gala, ...Plaintiff.
Versus
1. Mr. Keshavji Bharmal Shah & Ors. ...Defendants.
Mr. Rajmani P. Dwivedi, ….Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff.
Mr. Krishna Dev Pandey, …Ld. Advocate for the defendants.
Coram: R. R. Kale,
Judge, C. R. No. 35,
Date : 14th October, 2024.
ORAL ORDER :-
Perused the application and say filed thereon.
2. Heard both sides at length.
3. The plaintiff has moved the present application to remove
the matter for ‘dismissal order’ caption.
4. The plaintiff in brief in her application submits that, on
account of reasons stated in the application, the suit may kindly be
removed from ‘dismissal order’ caption or the order passed below Exh. 1
dated 28.06.2024 may kindly be set aside. Lastly, she has prayed to
allow her application.
5. The defendants have strongly resisted the present
application by filing reply on overleaf of it mainly on the ground that,
the plaintiff has made false statements in this application as well as in
application vide Exh. 17 and therefore, her prayer cannot be allowed.
/home/steno35/R. R. Kale- Judge- c.R.- 35-2024/Oct-2024/Orders/14-10/324- 2022- RAE- remove cap- Exh- 19- -.odt
-- 1 of 3 --
2
Lastly, they urged for dismissal of the application.
6. From the contents of the application and say filed thereon,
following points arose for my determination and I record my findings
thereon as under : -
Sr.No. Points Findings
1. Whether the application is liable to
allowed?
...Yes.
2. What order? ...Application
stands allowed on
cost.
:REASONS:
As to Point Nos. 1 and 2:
7. Heard both sides at length. After perusal of record and
roznama, it seems that, the matter has been kept for dismissal order as
per order dt. 28.06.2024 passed below Exh.1. I have also gone through
the present application as well as an application vide Exh. 17. It seems
that, no valid and satisfactory reasons are stated in the application to
allow the prayer of the plaintiff. However, it would be just and proper to
allow the present application by imposing cost. In doing so, no
prejudice would be caused to the other side. Therefore, in view of above
all discussion, I answer point no.1 in affirmative and in answer to point
no.2 , I proceed to pass the following order :-
: O R D E R :
1. Application vide Exh. 19 stands allowed
subject to cost of Rs. 500/-
2. The matter is removed from ‘dismissal
order’ caption and the plaintiff is allowed
to file the evidence affidavit in lieu of
examination in chief and the documents
/home/steno35/R. R. Kale- Judge- c.R.- 35-2024/Oct-2024/Orders/14-10/324- 2022- RAE- remove cap- Exh- 19- -.odt
-- 2 of 3 --
3
with list on record.
3 Cost be given to defendants on or before
next date.
(Dictated and pronounced in Open Court.)
Bandra -Mumbai. ( R. R. Kale )
Date : 14.10.2024. Judge, C. R. No.35.
Order dictated on computer :14.10.2024
Order checked & signed on :14.10.2024
/home/steno35/R. R. Kale- Judge- c.R.- 35-2024/Oct-2024/Orders/14-10/324- 2022- RAE- remove cap- Exh- 19- -.odt
-- 3 of 3 --