Allowed¶3

Anand Lodha v. Vasudev Dayaram Navani and 36 Ors.

Bombay HC8 Jul 2025IA/1990/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court; Abhay Ahuja, J.; IA No. 1990 of 2024 in Suit No. 964 of 2018; Anand Lodha v. Shabana Vasudev Navani & Ors.; extension of time to serve writ of summons; unserved defendants; amended plaint; last chance; correction of order date 6 March 2025; listing on 21 April 2025; Order VII Rule 11 CPC; rejection of plaint; interim applications; 3 April 2025.

What did the court decide?

Time to serve the writ of summons and amended Plaint upon the unserved Defendants extended by four weeks as a last chance; clerical date error in the order dated 6th March, 2025 corrected; IA No. 499 of 2025 and IA (L) No. 10576 of 2025 listed together on 21st April, 2025; objections to IA (L) No. 10576 of 2025 to be removed and registered number obtained by the next date. ¶3

Anand Lodha vs Vasudev Dayaram Navani and 36 Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶3

Issue for consideration

Whether time to serve the writ of summons and amended Plaint upon the unserved Defendants should be further extended. +2 more

¶1

Court's answer

Only as and by way of last chance, time to serve the writ of summons along with the amended Plaint upon the unserved Defendants is extended by a period of four weeks.

¶3

Ratio / Principle

The clerical error in the date recorded in paragraph 3 of the order dated 6th March, 2025 is corrected (to 21st April, 2025); rest of the order remains unchanged, and the corrected order is to be uploaded as soon as possible.

¶7

Key takeaways

Both interim applications, Interim Application No. 499 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025, are listed on 21st April, 2025.ratio¶9
Objections to Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 are to be removed and its registered number obtained by the next date.ratio¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Abhay Ahuja, J.), 3 April 2025, Interim Application No. 1990 of 2024 in Suit No. 964 of 2018 (Anand Lodha v. Shabana Vasudev Navani & Ors.) — On the Plaintiff's application, the Court, as and by way of last chance, extended by four weeks the time to serve the writ of summons and amended Plaint upon the unserved Defendants. It corrected the clerical error in paragraph 3 of the order dated 6th March, 2025, whereby the date was wrongly recorded as 21st March, 2025 instead of 21st April, 2025, and directed upload of the corrected order. It listed together on 21st April, 2025 the two Defendants' applications for rejection of Plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Interim Application No. 499 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 — and directed that objections to IA (L) No. 10576 of 2025 be removed and its registered number obtained by the next date.

¶1

IA 1990-24 in S 964-18.doc

¶2

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

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1990 OF 2024

¶4

¶5

SUIT NO. 964 OF 2018

¶6

Anand Lodha ...Applicant/Plaintiff V/s. Shabana Vasudev Navani & Ors. ...Defendants

¶7

Ms. Aparajita R. Jha i/b Mr. Rahul Kamarkar for the Plaintiff. Mr. Darshan R. Mehta i/b Dhruve Liladhar & Co. for the Defendants No. 2 to 4, 8 to 10, 16 to 18, 20,21,33 and 34.

¶8

Mr. Feroze Patel with Ms. Sehyr Tally i/b S. Mahomedbhai & Co. for the Defendants No. 5, 6 and 31.

¶9

Ms. Sharva Patel i/b Little & Co. for Defendants No. 25, 35 and 37. Ms. Khushnumah Banerjee i/b Vidhii Partners for the Defendant No. 30.

¶10

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 3^rd APRIL, 2025 P.C. :

¶11

This matter has been listed today at the behest of the Plaintiff

¶12

seeking extension of time to serve the writ of summons upon the unserved Defendants.

¶13

Ms. Jha, learned Counsel appearing for the Plaintiff draws this

¶14

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITAYOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date:2025.04.03 15:59:12 +0530

¶15

Court’s attention to the order dated 25^th October, 2024, submitting that although the time was granted to serve the writ of summons along with amended Plaint by the said order upon the unserved Defendants, however, some of the Defendants are yet to be served and therefore, this Court extend the time to do so.

¶16

Nikita Gadgil 1/3

¶17

IA 1990-24 in S 964-18.doc

¶18

Accordingly, only as and by way of last chance, time to serve the writ of summons along with the amended Plaint upon the unserved Defendants is extended by a period of four weeks.

¶19

Learned Counsel appearing for the Defendants No. 2 to 4, 8 to 10, 16 to 18, 20,21,33 and 34 and also for the Defendants No. 5, 6 and 31 submit that there are two Interim Applications viz. Interim Application No. 499 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 filed by the said Defendants for rejection of Plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶20

Mr. Mehta submits that by the order dated 6^th March, 2025, the Interim Application No. 499 of 2025 filed by one set of Defendants is scheduled to be listed on 21^st April, 2025.

¶21

Mr. Mehta points out that although in paragraph 3 of the said order dated 6^th March, 2025, the date is mentioned as 21^st March, 2025, however, the date should have been 21^st April, 2025.

¶22

Let the said error be corrected. Rest of the order remains as it is.

¶23

Let the corrected order be uploaded as soon as possible.

¶24

Nikita Gadgil 2/3

¶25

IA 1990-24 in S 964-18.doc

¶26

Mr. Patel, learned Counsel appearing for the other set of Defendants viz. Defendants No. 5, 6 and 31 submits that the Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 also be listed on 21^st April, 2025.

¶27

Accordingly, list the two Interim Applications viz. Interim Application No. 499 of 2025 and Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 on 21^st April, 2025.

¶28

Let the objections to the Interim Application (L) No. 10576 of 2025 be removed and registered number be obtained by the next date.

¶29

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶30

Nikita Gadgil 3/3

Anand Lodha v. Vasudev Dayaram Navani and 36 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Lodha v. Vasudev Dayaram Navani and 36 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

1B Sunita Waterston vs Bhagwan shahani

1a Seema King vs Bhagwan Tuljaram Shahani and Ors.

1a Seema King vs Bhagwan Tuljaram Shahani and Ors.

1a Seema King vs Bhagwan Tuljaram Shahani and Ors.

Shashikant Jaywant Shinde vs Mahesh Sambhajiraje Shinde

1a Seema King vs Bhagwan Tuljaram Shahani and Ors.