Allowed

Vibha Dutta Khosla and 2 Ors. v. Mohit Raina and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2019CHSCD/387/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chamber summons allowing amendment of the plaint in Commercial IP Suit No.393 of 2018 allowed. Plaintiff directed to serve amended plaint on all defendants and initiate service. Service of writ ordered on Defendant No.2. Plaintiff directed to pay nominal fee to KEM Hospital. Contradictions in affidavit found unsubstantiated.

What did the court decide?

Chamber summons allowed; amended plaint to be served within two weeks; writ to be issued and served on Defendant No.2; Rs.30,000 donation ordered.

Vibha Dutta Khosla and 2 Ors. Vs Mohit Raina… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

5.CHSCD-387-2018.doc

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

¶4

COMMERCIAL CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.387 OF 2018 IN

¶5

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.393 OF 2018

¶6

Vibha Dutta Khosla and Ors.

¶7

….Plaintiffs

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Mohit Raina and Ors. ….Defendants

¶10

Mr. Anuj Desai I/b. Fox Mandal Partners for applicants/plaintiffs. Mr. Sharique Nachan I/b. Faiz Merchand and Ramiz Shaikh for defendant no.1.

¶11

Mr. Zubin Behramkamdin a/w. Ms. Pooja Kshirsagar I/b. AZB and Partners for defendant nos.3 and 4.

¶12

Mr. Darshan Furia I/b. Mr. Ashish Mehta for defendant no.5.

¶13

CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM, J. DATE : 15^th JULY 2019

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

1 This chamber summons is for leave to amend the plaint. In this

¶16

case, even writ of summons has not been served and plaintiffs' counsel had no explanation whatsoever as to why writ of summons also has not been served on defendants.

¶17

2 Mr. Behramkamdin submitted that some admissions are being altered and that would prejudice defendants' rights. Mr. Behramkamdin read out the so called contradictions/admissions in the affidavit in support where they have allegedly culled out. I find no contradictions and any admissions. In any event, written statement is yet to be filed. I have also considered the amendments prayed for and I do not find that it changes the

Gauri Gaekwad

5.CHSCD-387-2018.doc

2/3

nature and character of the suit or it is barred by limitation or malafide can be attributed.

¶22

3 In the circumstances, chamber summons is allowed and accordingly disposed in terms of prayer clause - (a). No consequential amendments are permitted.

¶23

4 Amendment to be carried out and copy of the amended plaint to be served within two weeks from today.

¶24

5 The counsel appearing for defendant nos.1,3,4 and 5 waive service of writ of summons. These defendants shall file written statement and serve a copy thereof within four weeks of receiving copy of the amended plaint.

¶25

6 So far as defendant no.2 is concerned, plaintiffs shall apply for issuance of writ of summons during the course of this week and serve the writ of summons directly by hand delivery within two weeks of issuance of writ of summons and by usual mode of service in due course.

¶26

7 Affidavit of service shall be filed on or before 16.08.2019. If these directions regarding defendant no.2 are not strictly and meticulously complied with, suit against defendant no.2 will stand dismissed without further reference to this Court.

Gauri Gaekwad

5.CHSCD-387-2018.doc

3/3

8 Plaintiffs to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- as donation to Dean pbcf

¶31

kem hospital , K.E.M. Hospital, Dr. E. Borges Road, Parel, Mumbai – 400 012 within two weeks from today. s

¶32

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶33

Gauri Gaekwad

Vibha Dutta Khosla and 2 Ors. v. Mohit Raina and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vibha Dutta Khosla and 2 Ors. v. Mohit Raina and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Magna Developers Vs Alf Developers and Ors.

Richi Anurag Saboo Vs Canara Bank and 6 Others

John Jerome Dabreo and 3 Ors. Vs the Secretatry, Azad Nagar Krupa Sagar Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Pentagram Films Pvt. Ltd. Vs Arjun Rampal and 3 Ors.

Sajjid Amir Khan and 2 Ors. Vs Shree Developers

Sucden India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Cane Agro Energy (India) Ltd.