Remanded

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia and Anr. v. Jam-E-Jamshed Private Ltd. and Ors.

Bombay HC20 Jul 2022WP/8255/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the rejection of their applications for appointment of a Commissioner for cross-examination. The High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matters for fresh consideration, directing the lower court to consider new medical certificates.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 25th April, 2022 set aside; matters remanded for fresh consideration. Petitioners directed to file applications within two weeks.

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia and Anr. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

Digitally signed by MUGDHA M MUGDHA M PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2022.07.20 18:48:54 +0530

¶2

1 7-WP 8255-22 & 8-WP 8256-22.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.8255 OF 2022

¶5

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia & Anr. ... Petitioners Vs. Jam-E-Jamshed Private Limited & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

AND

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.8256 OF 2022

¶8

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia & Anr. ... Petitioners Vs.

¶9

Jam-E-Jamshed Private Limited & Ors. … Respondents

¶10

Mr. Darshit Jain i/by Mrs. Divya D. Jain & Mr. Dileep Satale for the Petitioners in both WPs.

¶11

Ms. Sukeshi Bhandari a/w Mr. Akshay Chauhan for Respondent No.1 in both WPs.

¶12

CORAM: ABHAY AHUJA J.

¶13

DATE : 20TH JULY 2022

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

1. By these Petitions, the Petitioners are aggrieved by the

¶16

orders dated 25^th April, 2022 of the learned Judge, Small Causes Court rejecting the applications made by Petitioner No.1 for appointment of Commissioner for his cross-examination in R.A.D.

¶17

Suit No. 626 of 2005 and R.A.D. Suit No. 625 of 2005.

¶18

1 of 4

¶19

Mugdha

¶20

2 7-WP 8255-22 & 8-WP 8256-22.odt

¶21

The Petitioner No.1 is a senior citizen who travels from

¶22

his residence at South Mumbai to his offce at Nariman Point. Due to Covid-19 pandemic, he was advised not to travel long distance. Therefore, he made an application for appointment of Commissioner for his cross-examination in the two Suits. He produced the medical certifcate in support to demonstrate that he is suffering from heart related ailments and hyper tension because of which he was advised not to travel long distance.

¶23

After considering the said certifcate and rival contentions of the contesting parties in the applications, the learned Judge rejected the applications made by Petitioner No.1, inter alia, on the ground that the doctor who issued the certifcate holds Diploma in Child Health and does not have expertise in the heart related disease.

¶24

Mr. Jain, learned Counsel for the Petitioners draws attention of this Court to the medical certifcate dated 20^th May, 2022 (Exhibit ‘K’ to Writ Petition No.8255 of 2022 & Exhibit ‘L’ to Writ Petition No.8256 of 2022), issued by Dr. D. D. Tanna, Consulting Orthopedic Surgeon certifying that Petitioner No.1 is

¶25

2 of 4

¶26

Mugdha

¶27

3 7-WP 8255-22 & 8-WP 8256-22.odt

¶28

suffering from OA Lumber Spine-age related with the result that he cannot stand or sit for a long time. The certifcate also states that Petitioner No.1 has even otherwise been advised to go easy on his offce routine and avoid sitting at a time for more than 10-15 minutes.

¶29

Ms. Bhandari, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 submits that the abovementioned certifcate was not even before the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court.

¶30

Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, in my view, the interests of justice would be served if the certifcate dated 20^th May, 2022 is placed before the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court. Learned Counsel for the parties also agree with the same.

¶31

In this view of the matter, orders dated 25^th April, 2022 in both Suits are set aside and the matters are remanded back for the fresh consideration.

¶32

3 of 4

¶33

Mugdha

¶34

4 7-WP 8255-22 & 8-WP 8256-22.odt

¶35

Let Petitioners fle necessary applications before the

¶36

learned Judge of the Small Causes Court within two weeks annexing the certifcate dated 20^th May, 2022 alongwith any other material in support of the applications for appointment of Commissioner in the said Suits. The applications to be considered on their own merits in accordance with law.

¶37

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶38

4 of 4

¶39

Mugdha

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia and Anr. v. Jam-E-Jamshed Private Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia and Anr. v. Jam-E-Jamshed Private Ltd. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishnu Krushna More Vs Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division and Ors.

Mrs. Meera Chandrabhan Singh Thakur Sole Prop. of M/S Thakur Developers Vs Competent Auth. and Dist. Deputy Registrar of Co-Op. Soc. Dist. Thane and Ors.

Ladkya Rupa Kharpade Vs Laxman Jethya Dombre and Ors.

Chandrakant Shankar Adake Vs Veershaiv Co-Op. Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Anant Sadba Shelar Vs State of Maharashtra through Collector, Pune and Ors.

Madhusudan Brijlal Vakharia and Anr. Vs Jam E Jamshed Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.