Appeal against Trial Judge's order correcting minutes to clarify plaintiffs' liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause action after withdrawal of original suit. High Court found no error requiring interference.
Appeal dismissed; Notice of Motion disposed of as non-surviving.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
kambli
appl-170-14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO.170 OF 2014
IN
SUIT NO.2769 OF 2011
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION (L) NO.725 OF 2014
Mahanagar Co-operative Bank Ltd.
...Appellant
v/s.
Prachi Prabhakar Vaidya & ors.
...Respondents
Mr.D.D.Madon, Sr.Advocate i/b M/s.Sarwankar & Co. for the appellant.
Mr.Vaibhav Joglekar with Mr.Y.R.Shah and Mr.P.B.Kamble for respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S.SANKLECHA, J. DATE : 25 APRIL 2014
P.C.:
This appeal is directed against the order dated 17 February 2014 of the learned Trial Judge on an application for speaking to the minutes of the order in Suit No.2769 of 2011. The respondent-plaintiffs had filed a suit for injunction to restrain defendant No.1-Bank (present appellant) from dispossessing the plaintiffs from the suit premises. The plaintiffs' advocate, thereafter, filed a praecipe dated 9 November 2011, which reads as under:-
“Be pleased to place on board the above suit for withdrawal before His Lordship Mr.Justice Vazifdar on Friday 11 day of November 2011.
The plaintiffs desirous to withdraw the suit as they intend to file the exhaustive fresh suit.”
1 of 3
2
kambli
appl-170-14
“Suit allowed to be withdrawn. The Court fees, however, shall be paid after giving credit for the amount to be refunded by virtue of withdrawal of the suit.”
“4.66 On 9.11.2011, the plaintiffs submitted a precipe for withdrawal of the said Suit (Lodging) No.2051 of 2011 with liberty to file a substantive suit. The Hon'ble High Court was pleased to pass an order dated 11.11.2011 thereby allowing the plaintiffs to withdraw the said suit with liberty to file a fresh substantive suit. The plaintiffs crave leave to refer to and rely upon the said order dated 11.11.2011, when produced.”
2 of 3
3
kambli
appl-170-14
“In the circumstances, the order dated 11.11.2011 is corrected by adding at the end of the first sentence the words “with liberty to file a fresh suit, including on the same cause of action.”
9. Appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
(M.S.SANKLECHA, J.)
3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order correcting the minutes of the order to include liberty to file a fresh suit warrants interference in appeal.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Trial Judge's order clarifying the liberty to file a subsequent suit.
Mahanagar Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Prachi Prabhakar Vaidya
others
MOHIT S. SHAH
M.S. SANKLECHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
