Narendra Kumar Kochar vs. Bhagwan Deendayal Punjabi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 5702 OF 2013

Narendra Kumar Kochar ..petitioner.

Vs

Bhagwan Deendayal Punjabi .. Respondent

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.12083 OF 2013

Bhagwan Deendayal Punjabi ..petitioner.

Vs

Narendra Kumar Kocchar .. Respondent

Mr. P.S.Dani, Advocate for the petitioner in WP/5702/13 and respondent in WP/12083/2013.

Mr. Kiran Kulkarni i/b Kulkarni & Associates Advocates for the respondent WP/5702/2013 and petitioner in WP/12083/2013.

CORAM : R.G.KETKAR,J. DATE : 23/12/2013

PC:

1. Heard Mr. P.S.Dani, learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.5702 of 2013 and for the respondent in Writ Petition No.12083 of 2013 and Mr Kiran Kulkarni, learned counsel for the respondent in Writ Petition No.5702 of 2013 and for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.12083 of 2013, at length.

2. Writ Petition No.5702 of 2013 is filed by the original defendant challenging the Judgment and order dated 28.2.2013 passed by the Appellate Bench of the Small Causes Court in Revision No.20 of 2013. By that order, the Appellate Court

allowed the revision application filed by the respondent, hereinafter referred to as 'plaintiff', and quashed and set aside the Judgment and order dated 18.12.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Court Room No.32 of Small Causes Court at Bombay (Bandra Branch), below Exhibit-41 in R.A.E.Suit No.257 of 2009. The learned trial Judge allowed the application made by the defendant and directed the plaintiff to produce documents mentioned in the letter dated 29.10.2012 before the next date. By order dated 28.2.2013, the Appellate Court set aside the trial Court's order and in effect dismissed the application at Exhibit-41 made by the defendant.

3. Writ Petition No.12083 of 2013 is preferred by the plaintiff challenging the Judgment and order dated 18.12.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Court Room no. 32 of the Small Causes Court at Bombay (Bandra Branch), below Exhibit-41 in the same suit, where the application made by the defendant under Order 11 rule 4 of C.P.C. was allowed.

4. After arguing the petitions for quite some time, Mr Dani upon taking instructions from Mr Narendra Kumar Kocchar, petitioner in Writ Petition No.5702 of 2013 and respondent in Writ Petition No. 12083 of 2013, states that he will withdraw Application at Exhibit -41 made by him. He further states tht the defendant, during the course of his evidence, will lead evidence to substantiate his case that the plaintiff has other premises in Mumbai as also about his financial capacity.

5. In view thereof, Application at Exhibit-41 is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is expressly made clear that in case the defendant leads evidence on this aspect, the plaintiff would be at liberty to raise such objections that are available to him including about relevancy of these documents as also on the ground that there is no such pleading.

In view thereof, writ petitions are disposed of as infructuous. The impugned orders are dissolved.

(R.G.KETKAR, J.)