VIJAY KRISHANJI SAWANT Vs. FRANCIS JOHN QUINNY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Interim Application filed by the Defendants No. 1 and 2 seeks condonation of delay of 776 days in filing the written statement after setting aside the order dtd. 15/12/2023, passed by the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court, transferring the Suit to the list of undefended suits inter alia against the Defendants No. 1 and 2.

(2.) Mr. Mogre, learned Counsel appearing for the said Defendants submits that the delay has mainly been caused as the Applicants were not aware of the Suit until the 16/3/2024, when the amended Plaint was served upon the said Defendants. That it is only when the reply was filed that the said Defendants came to know that the writ of summons had been served on 19/8/2020. Mr. Mogre would submit that in fact the address on which the writ of summons is purported to have been served is a commercial premises and the Applicants do not operate from those premises since many years as the said premises is locked. Mr. Mogre would submit that in any case if the said packets as claimed by the Plaintiffs were received, the same have been received during the Covid-19 Pandemic period and the said envelopes were not traceable as it was peak Covid period particularly in Mumbai at that time. That the Applicant No. 1 being at an advanced age was extra cautious and strictly observing social distancing even while moving out of house for business and court related work. It is submitted that during that period he was staying isolated at home and also not touching documents, courier, parcels for several days/months due to fear of catching infection as he had to be extra cautious being senior citizen. That, therefore, the Applicant No. 1 does not recollect whether the copy of the writ of summons was received or not. However, Mr. Mogre submits that even if it is assumed that the said writ of summons is received on 19/8/2020, in view of the suo motu orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the period till 30/5/2022 would be excluded for filing any written statement. That because the papers during this period were misplaced/lost, the Applicants could not take steps to engage advocates and it was only when the amended Plaint was received on 16/3/2024, that after engaging appropriate advocate, this Interim Application has been taken out on 19/7/2024. Mr. Mogre submits that the delay that has been caused is unintentional and due to lack of knowledge on the part of the Applicants.

(3.) Mr. Mogre also submits that the written statement is ready and the Applicants have a good case on merits as in fact the Plaintiffs have no locus to stake claim to the subject land. That the Applicant No. 1- Vijay Sawant is the partner of the Applicant No. 2, who has developed the said land and also created third party rights and the Plaintiffs are seeking to claim rights over the subject land on the basis of Letter of Administration dtd. 10/7/2019, which is after 48 years of the death of original owner of the land viz. Mr. Louis Francis Misquita. That wife of Mr. Louis Misquita had transferred rights in respect of the subject land by various agreements to the developers in respect where of developments had been undertaken and third party rights have already been created.