*1* nms.3068.10.chs.1697.10.s.916.09.25 kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1697 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.916 OF 2009 Asif Raza Khan. ..Plaintiff -Versus- SMS Construction Company. ..Defendant .......... Mr.Shailesh Shah a/w Mr.B.S.Nayak, for the Plaintiff. Mr.Dipesh Siroya, for the Defendant. Mr.Vivek Khemka, for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 20th December, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused with their assistance the Chamber Summons and the affidavit in support, so also, the reply and rejoinder. 2 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the Chamber Summons deserves to be allowed not only for bringing on record the events that are set out in the affidavit in support but also to enable the Court to effectively and completely determine the question in controversy and pass a binding decree. 3 Reliance is placed upon the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 19.06.2009 in Chamber Summons No.68/2009 in Suit No.2967/2001 (Haroon Rashid Nizamuddin Umatiya v/s Jivatlal Purtapshi and another). Having perused that order and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court relied upon therein, I am of the view that in *2* nms.3068.10.chs.1697.10.s.916.09.25 the instant case I have noted that the Respondent claims to have acquired a title to the property from the original Defendant and further physical possession thereof. There is controversy as to whether the physical possession has been handed over or not. Therefore, with a view to avoid complications in future and with a view to enable the Court to pass a final and a binding decree, the joinder of the Respondent is necessary in the peculiar facts of this case. The Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Amendment be carried out within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J) *3* nms.3068.10.chs.1697.10.s.916.09.25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.3068 OF 2010 IN SUIT NO.916 OF 2009 Asif Raza Khan. ..Plaintiff -Versus- SMS Construction Company. ..Defendant .......... Mr.Shailesh Shah a/w Mr.B.S.Nayak, for the Plaintiff. Mr.Dipesh Siroya, for the Defendant. Mr.Vivek Khemka, for the Respondent. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 20th December, 2010. P.C. 1 Mr.Shah, learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff, tenders a rejoinder. The Defendant’s Advocate seeks time to file a further reply. 2 From reading of the order passed by this Court on 19.11.2010, it is clear that the additional affidavit filed by the original Defendant, so also, the reply to the Chamber Summons by the Respondent, does not inspire confidence and state nothing conclusively about factum of physical possession. 3 For all these reasons, granting liberty to the Plaintiff to apply for ad-interim relief including that of appointment of the Court Receiver, this rejoinder affidavit is taken on record and the Notice of Motion shall appear under the same caption on 17th January, 2011. All contentions on merits, as also, on the question of interim reliefs are kept open. Without prejudice thereto, it is directed that the order dated 19.11.2010 shall continue to operate until further orders of this Court. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)