Shri Chaitanya Nagoso Niranjan & Anr. vs M/s Krishiratna Cold Storage and Ors.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
M. S. SONAK, J
Shri Chaitanya Nagoso Niranjan & Anr. – Appellant
Versus
M/s Krishiratna Cold Storage and Ors. – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. S. S. Patwardhan, Mr. Bhushan Mandlik
For the Respondents: Mr. Dilip B. Shinde

Table of Content
1. trial court's jurisdiction and discretion in allowing written statements. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. judicial discretion must adhere to established principles. (Para 11 , 12 , 14 , 15)
3. final decision regarding cost implications and trial conduct. (Para 19 , 20)

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Patwardhan for the petitioners and Mr. Shinde for respondent no. 2. Other respondents are duly served and there is also a notice for final hearing of this petition at the stage of final disposal.

2. Respondent no. 1 is the partnership firm which is represented by respondent no. 2. This means that the respondents have been served effectively and represented.

3. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith in view of order dated 6th February 2013.

4. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 2nd February 2012 by which the respondents were permitted to file their written statements after condoning the delay, subject to payment of costs of Rs. 2,500/- by each of the respondents, i.e. costs of Rs. 10,000/-.

5. Mr. Patwardhan, learned counsel for the petitioners-original plaintiffs submits that when the matter was posted for judgment and at that stage learned trial judge lacked jurisdictio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

BOMBAY HIGH COURTM. S. SONAK, JShri Chaitanya Nagoso Niranjan & Anr. – AppellantVersusM/s Krishiratna Cold Storage and Ors. – Respondent

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
M. S. SONAK, J
Shri Chaitanya Nagoso Niranjan & Anr. – Appellant
Versus
M/s Krishiratna Cold Storage and Ors. – Respondent