Appeal against dismissal of a Notice of Motion seeking return of plaint was not pressed because the suit had transferred to the City Civil Court, Mumbai after its pecuniary jurisdiction was raised. Appeal disposed of as not pressed; interim application also disposed of.
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.
Digitally signed LAXMIKANT by LAXMIKANT GOPAL GOPAL CHANDAN CHANDAN Date: 2024.04.02 18:52:32 +0530
1 (3) APP-56.20.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO.56 OF 2020 IN NOTICE OF MOTION NO.643 OF 2018 IN SUIT NO.717 OF 2013 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.513 OF 2019 IN
APPEAL NO.56 OF 2020
Zainab Rafiullah Shaikh : Appellant/Applicant. (Original Defendant No.3)
Vs.
Puthenveedu Joseph Mathew & ors. : Respondents.
Mr. Anil V. Anturkar, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Pradhuman Chauhan and Mr. Arya Sapre for the Appellant/Applicant.
Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar a/w Mr. Vikramjit Garewal, Mr. Umesh Tiwari i/by Advocate Rashmi Pendse for Respondent No.3.
Mr. S. K. Dhekale, Court Receiver, present.
CORAM : DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ. & ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 12th FEBRUARY 2024
1 of 3
LGC
2 (3) APP-56.20.doc
P.C.
pressed.
2 of 3
LGC
3 (3) APP-56.20.doc
Application No.513 of 2019 does not survive and the same is
accordingly disposed of.
(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)
(CHIEF JUSTICE)
3 of 3
LGC
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal seeking return of plaint under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 should be pressed given transfer of the suit to the City Civil Court after amendment of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 194
Zainab Rafiullah Shaikh
Puthenveedu Joseph Mathew & ors.
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya
Arif S. Doctor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
