Interim Order 24

Order Details: Order on Exhibit
Pdf Text: ..1..
(CNR No. MHSCA3-001177-2022)
IN THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT MUMBAI
(BANDRA BRANCH)
ORDE BELOW EXHIBIT NO.64
IN
R.A.D. SUIT NO. 429 OF 2022
Haji Mehmood Abdul Rahman Jalil Pitalwala ... Plaintiff
Versus
1. Ram Kumar Jalan Public Charitable Trust
and others … Defendants
Shri. D. D. Singh, Ld. Advocate for the plaintiff.
Shri. Dinesh Pandey i/b. Shri. Ritesh A. Singh, Ld. Advocate for
defendant Nos.6 & 7.
Coram : Shri. S. N. Godbole, Judge.
C.R.No.34 (BB).
Date : 07.11.2025.
ORAL ORDER :-
1. This is an application filed by Ld. Advocate for the
plaintiff for removing the matter from “further order” caption dated
20.06.2025.
2. Perused the application and handwritten say given by Ld.
Advocate for defendant Nos.6 & 7. Heard both the sides.
3. Perusal of record it reveals that the matter was kept for
filing evidence of the plaintiff. As the plaintiff failed to file evidence,
the matter is kept for further order. According to the Ld. Advocate
for the plaintiff, the plaintiff is absolutely not able to move anywhere
as on 17.12.2024 as he suffered from severe heart stroke and
admitted to Criticare Hospital at Andheri West where he had
undergone angioplasty. The plaintiff again suffered heart stroke and
/home/steno34/CR-34 HHJ SNG/2025/November/Exh-64 in RAD S.No.429-22 remove from order caption.odt
-- 1 of 2 --
..2..
was hospitalized on 23.06.2025 in Northern Care Hospital ad Dahisar
East, where he undergone bypass surgery. The condition of the
plaintiff is still critical and he has been advised complete bed rest and
absolutely not to travel, move from house.
4. It is to be noted that the aforesaid submission of Ld.
Advocate for the plaintiff is supported by medical papers and
photographs of the plaintiff, which are annexed along-with present
application. Further, the defendants have also not disputed about
undergoing angioplasty by the plaintiff. Therefore, it appears that
the plaintiff has shown sufficient and cogent reason for non-filing
evidence. Apart from this, today the plaintiff is present before the
Court and filed his affidavit of examination-in-chief. Therefore,
considering the nature of suit and reasons mentioned in the
application, it is necessary to give an opportunity to the plaintiff to
proceed further in the matter. Therefore, it is just and proper to
remove the matter from the order caption. Thus, the application
deserves to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:-
ORDER
1. Application Exhibit No.64 is allowed.
2. The matter be removed from the order caption.
3. Costs in cause.
Place : Mumbai (S. N. Godbole)
Date : 07.11.2025 Judge,C.R.No.34(BB).
Order Dictated & Typed on : 07.11.2025
Order Checked & Signed on : 07.11.2025
/home/steno34/CR-34 HHJ SNG/2025/November/Exh-64 in RAD S.No.429-22 remove from order caption.odt
-- 2 of 2 --