JOSE COUTINHO Vs. ARVIND J PURANIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Lotlikar, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kamat, the learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) RULE, by consent heard forthwith.

(3.) MR. Lotlikar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the Trial Court has erred in holding that the petitioner was actually served on 21.04.2008 when in fact, the summons was served on Jose Fernandes and not on the petitioner. He further submitted that the reason given by the petitioner i.e. the petitioner could not file the written statement since he had engaged surveyor, who took time in preparing the report on the basis of which the written statement was filed, has not been considered by the Trial Court. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional error warranting interference by this Court. The learned Counsel further submitted that serious prejudice would be caused to the petitioner if the impugned order is not set aside.