Interim Order 4

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: 1
CNR NO.MHSCA-30009232021
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
(BANDRA BRANCH)
ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT NO.31
IN
R.A.D. SUIT NO.391 OF 2021
1. Mr. Tarachand Mahadeo Dayma and anr. . . Plaintiffs.
Versus
1. Mr. Bhavesh Mohanlal Thakkar and ors. . . Defendants.
Coram : A.S. Pandagle, Judge
C.R.No.32
Date : 27/9/2023.
ORAL ORDER :
1. Perused the application and say filed thereon.
2. Heard both sides.
3. Present application is filed on behalf of plaintiff for
condonation of delay for carrying out amendment. By filing present
application it is contended that vide order dated 7/10/2022 this
Court allowed to add the third party applicant as defendant within
14 days, as the plaintiff is desirous to file the Revision against the
said order meanwhile the third party applicant has taken out an
application dated 4/11/2022, in view thereof and without prejudice
to the plaintiff’s remedy of approaching Higher Court, the plaintiff be
permitted to carry out amendment by condoning the delay.
4. On the other hand, defendant by filing reply resisted the
application and contended that delay is not properly mentioned, the
plaintiff intentionally not carried out amendment, delay is not
/home/steno32/Desktop/2023-ASP/Order/Sept/E-31-RAD-391-2021.odt
-- 1 of 2 --
2
satisfactorily explained. Therefore, submitted that application may
be rejected with costs.
5. After hearing both sides, gone through the contents of
the application and reply filed thereon, also gone through the record
of the proceedings. By way of this application plaintiff seeking
permission to carry out amendment in respect of impleading the
proposed defendant No.6 in this proceeding as per order dated
7/10/2022 passed below Exh.9. On perusal of record it appears that
application Exh.9 is filed by Mamchand Udaychand Dayma i.e. third
party applicant i.e. the proposed defendant No.6. The said
application was allowed on 7/10/2022 and plaintiff by way of said
order directed to add the applicant as defendant. In this application
it is contended by the plaintiff that the plaintiff is desirous to file the
Revision against the said order, therefore, there is delay for
impleading the name of proposed defendant No.6 in this proceeding.
The Ld. Advocate for proposed defendant No.6 relied upon cited case
laws Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. reported
in AIR 1962 SC 361 and Suzuki Parasrampuria Suitings Pvt. Ltd. Vs.
The Official Liquidator of Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. and Ors.
Manu/SC/1126/2018. Both the cited case laws are on the different
aspect and not applicable to the present case. Considering the
reason stated in this application, delay caused for impleading the
name of proposed defendant No.6 in title clause of the plaint is
hereby condoned. Plaintiff is permitted to carry out the proposed
amendment as per order passed below Exh.9 dated 7/10/2022.
Bandra - Mumbai. ( A.S. Pandagle )
Date : 27/9/2023. Judge, C. R. No.32.
..
/home/steno32/Desktop/2023-ASP/Order/Sept/E-31-RAD-391-2021.odt
-- 2 of 2 --