Ahuja Properties And Developers ... vs Bharat Muddanna Shetty
2021 Latest Caselaw 8790 Bom

                                                 1. SJ No. 9 of 2021.odt



          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
            INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 14350 OF 2021
                                 WITH
            INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 14343 OF 2021
                                    IN
                SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 9 OF 2021


 Ahuja Properties and Developers and 2              ...Applicants
 Ors.

 IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

 Bharat Muddanna Shetty                             Plaintiff

         Versus
 Ahuja Properties and Developers and 2              ...DefendantS
 Ors.


                               ALONGWITH
              SUMMONS FOR JUDGMENT NO. 9 OF 2021
                             IN
             COMMERCIAL SUMMARY SUIT NO. 6 OF 2021


 Bharat Muddanna Shetty                             ...Plaintiff
         Versus
 Ahuja Properties and Developers and 2              ...Defendants
 Ors.


                                 ----------

 Seema                                                                        1/3




::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2021                  ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2021 04:51:47 :::
                                                    1. SJ No. 9 of 2021.odt



 Mr. Gauraj Shah i/by Prime Legem - Advocate for the plaintiff.

 Mikhail Behl a/w Saira Mirzankar a/w Madhukar Mulay -
 Advocate for the Defendant Nos. 1 to 3.

                                   ----------
                           CORAM : DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

DATE : 05th JULY 2021.

P.C. :

As the record reveals, in this Commercial Summary Suit the defendants entered their appearance on time. But they have not responded to the Summons for Judgment within the prescribed time. There is a delay of 105 days. To have that delay condoned, under Order 37 Rule 3 (7) of the CPC, the defendants have come up with Interim Application (L) No. 14350 of 2021.

2. Heard.

3. Given the prevailing pandemic and the judicial directives of the Supreme Court issued from time to time, the delay ought to be condoned. And it stands condoned. Thus, the Interim Application (L) No. 14350 of 2021 is allowed.

4. In the Interim Application (L) No. 14343 of 2021, seeking leave to defend, the defendants have taken various pleas

--some technical and some impinging on the merits of the matter.

5. In response to the submissions advanced by the

Seema 2/3

1. SJ No. 9 of 2021.odt

defendants' counsel, the plaintiff's counsel refers to the defendants' contention that the suit cannot be a Commercial Summary Suit. He leaves it to the Court to treat it as either a Commercial Summary Suit or a Summary Suit. According to him, nothing much turns upon that distinction.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the defendants has submitted that it is between the plaintiff and the Court to determine the nature of the proceedings; only thereafter will the defendants come into picture.

7. At any rate, the plaintiff has no objection if the Court treats this suit, as the learned counsel puts it, as a simple Summary Suit simpliciter.

8. As a result, I direct the Registry to re-number the Suit as Summary Suit rather than as the Commercial Summary Suit, and place it before the Court. Then, the Court will consider the defendants' interim application for leave to defend.

9. Post the matter on 13.07.2021. In the meanwhile, if the plaintiff files any reply to the defendants' application for leave to defend, it will receive it.

                                [DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.]




 Seema                                                                       3/3