Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sunil B. Bhosale, was the original defendant in Suit No.4351 of 1996 filed by the respondent, Kamal Organic Chemicals, a division of Kirti Manor Properties and Hotels Private Limited. The plaintiff had appointed the defendant as a consultant for process design, detailed engineering, fabrication, and erection of a plant at Lote Parshuram. The defendant submitted a quotation of Rs.17.34 lakhs and was paid Rs.11,25,000/-. Disputes arose, and the plaintiff filed the suit. On 13th November, 2009, the learned Single Judge passed an order imposing a condition that the defendant deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- for reconsideration of certain matters. The defendant filed a Notice of Motion (No.1766 of 2011) seeking reconsideration of that condition, which was dismissed on 20th November, 2015. The defendant appealed. The Division Bench examined the factual matrix and the earlier orders. The Court noted that the condition was imposed after considering the defendant's conduct and the amount involved. The defendant failed to show any change in circumstances or that the condition was arbitrary. The Court found no reason to interfere with the discretionary order of the Single Judge. The appeal was dismissed, and the Notice of Motion (L) No.3283 of 2015 was disposed of.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Appeal against order refusing reconsideration of deposit condition - Order 41 Rule 1, Order 43 Rule 1(r), Section 151 CPC - The appellant-defendant challenged the dismissal of his Notice of Motion seeking reconsideration of the condition to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- imposed by the order dated 13th November, 2009. The Court held that the condition was not arbitrary and the defendant failed to demonstrate any change in circumstances warranting reconsideration. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-26)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the appellant's Notice of Motion seeking reconsideration of the condition to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- imposed by the earlier order dated 13th November, 2009.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The Notice of Motion (L) No.3283 of 2015 is disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Order 41 Rule 1 CPC
- Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC
- Section 151 CPC
- Deposit condition as a precondition for reconsideration
- No change in circumstances
- No interference with discretionary order
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (03) 68
APPEAL (L) NO.897 OF 2015
V. M. KANADE, REVATI MOHITE DERE
Mr. P. K. Dhakephalkar, Sr. Counsel with Mr. Y. V. Divekar, Ms. Ashwini Pawar and Ms. Sayali Gharpure I/b M/s. Divekar & Co. for the Appellant. Mr. K. R. Bulchandani with Mr. Anoop Sharma and Mr. Amit Nikam I/b Mr. S. M. Kazi for the Respondent.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against dismissal of Notice of Motion seeking reconsideration of a deposit condition imposed in a commercial suit.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought setting aside of the order dated 20th November, 2015 dismissing his Notice of Motion for reconsideration of the condition to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/-.
Filing Reason
The appellant was aggrieved by the condition imposed by the learned Single Judge on 13th November, 2009 requiring him to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- as a precondition for reconsideration.
Previous Decisions
The learned Single Judge on 13th November, 2009 imposed a condition that the defendant deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/-. The defendant's Notice of Motion seeking reconsideration of that condition was dismissed on 20th November, 2015.
Issues
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the Notice of Motion seeking reconsideration of the deposit condition.
Whether the condition to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- was arbitrary or warranted reconsideration.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the condition to deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/- was onerous and that there was a change in circumstances justifying reconsideration.
The respondent contended that the condition was justified and there was no change in circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The imposition of a deposit condition as a precondition for reconsideration is a discretionary order. The appellant failed to demonstrate any change in circumstances or that the condition was arbitrary. Therefore, no interference is warranted.
Judgment Excerpts
The appellant has impugned the order dated 20th November, 2015, passed by the learned Single Judge, by which his Notice of Motion, seeking reconsideration of the condition, imposed by the learned Single Court vide order dated 13th November, 2009 inasmuch as, it directs the appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/-, came to be dismissed.
Procedural History
The plaintiff filed Suit No.4351 of 1996. On 13th November, 2009, the learned Single Judge imposed a condition that the defendant deposit Rs.1,50,00,000/-. The defendant filed Notice of Motion No.1766 of 2011 seeking reconsideration, which was dismissed on 20th November, 2015. The defendant appealed vide Appeal (L) No.897 of 2015, which was dismissed by the Division Bench on 18th March, 2016.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 41 Rule 1, Order 43 Rule 1(r), Section 151
