: 1 : USJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1919 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 3063 OF 1996 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. .. Plaintiffs V/s. Smt. Saroj Maheshwari .. Defendant WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1921 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2972 OF 1995 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. .. Plaintiffs V/s. Shaikh Subhan Anwar .. Defendant WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1922 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2431 OF 1995 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. .. Plaintiffs V/s. M/s. P. Chandrakant & Co. .. Defendant WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1924 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 2375 OF 1996 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. .. Plaintiffs V/s. Mulla Alibhai Ali Mohammad .. Defendant WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1926 OF 2008 IN SUIT NO. 4883 OF 1995 The Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. .. Plaintiffs V/s. Dr. Narotlamdas Khimchand Shah .. Defendant : 2 : ..... Mr. Rajendra Thakkar a/w. Jyoti Thakkar for the plaintiffs None for the defendant. ..... CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2009. P.C. : 1. These Chamber Summons are placed before me and the request is to condone the delay in notifying appointment of the Arbitrator in terms of the order dated 14th January, 2008 passed in this suit. 2. The Chamber Summons has been moved on 11th December, 2008 and in the affidavit in support, it is stated that within a period of 8 weeks as per order passed by this Court, the Arbitrator had to be appointed. The Arbitrator has been appointed on 27th March, 2008. There is a delay of 17 days in appointing the Arbitrator which should be condoned. 3. In the affidavit in support, it is pointed out as to in what circumstances the delay has occurred. There are several matters and after MTNL plaintiff s attention was invited to the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court and Section 7-B of the Indian Telegraph Act 1885, it was clearly conceded that the matter must go for arbitration. Accordingly, this Court disposed off the suit with the directions referred above. : 3 : 4. My attention is invited to Section 148 of the C.P.C. and it is stated that if any time is fixed or granted by the Court for the doing of any act prescribed or allowed by this Court, the Court may, in its discretion, from time to time, enlarge such period even though the period in that regard, fixed or granted, may have expired. 5. Having perused the order passed by this Court with the assistance of the learned advocate for the plaintiffs so also the order dated 18th October, 2008 passed by learned Single Judge in similar facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that in the interest of justice and when none is opposing the request of the plaintiffs so also the delay being marginal and has not occurred on account of any willful default or deliberate negligence, the Chamber Summons is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) in each of these matters. No order as to costs. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)