Regency Convention Centre And Hotels Pvt.Ltd. v. The Airports Authority Of India And ORS.

NMS4301.09-2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4301 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO.6846 OF 1999 Regency Convention Centre & Hotels Pvt.Ltd.

....Plaintiffs V/s.

The Airports Authority of India & Ors.

....Defendants ---- Mr.Kunal Dwarkadas a/w Mr.Shreekant Mehta i/by M/s.Malvi Ranchoddas & Co. for plaintiffs.

Dr.Abhinav Chandrachud a/w Mr.Kunal Chheda i/by M.V.Kini & co. for respondent no.1.

Mr.Jaydeep Shringare i/by Chitnis Vaithy & Co. for defendant nos.2 to 16.

Mr.Farid Karachiwala & Sneh Mehta i/by Wadia Ghandy & Co. for defendant no.17.

---- CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 27.10.2016 P.C.:- The counsel for the applicants states on instructions that in view of the orders passed in Notice of Motion No.1277 of 2000 and Notice of Motion No.879 of 2006 on 2.5.2001 and 21.3.2006 respectively, this Notice of Motion be disposed as withdrawn. Notice of Motion disposed as withdrawn.

Mr.Dwarkadas also states that the plaintiffs' evidence is closed and defendant no.1 has filed the affidavit in lieu of examination in chief of their first witness together with compilation of documents. Admission and denial of documents is also over. The KJ

NMS4301.09-2 counsel for the defendant no.1 states that within two weeks from today, they will file list of witnesses and also serve copy thereof upon the plaintiffs and the other defendants.

Suit be listed on 25.11.2016 for marking of documents and receiving evidence on record on which date first witness of defendant no.1 to remain present in Court.

The counsel for defendant no.17 states that defendant no.17 was joined as a party to the suit in April-2016 and that too after the plaintiffs' closed their evidence. The counsel for the defendant no.17 states that the written statement of defendant no.17 is ready and seeks leave to file the same in the registry. Leave granted. Registry to accept the written statement and take the same on record subject to removal of all office objections.

The counsel for plaintiffs states that they have considered copy of the written statement and states that the issues already settled need not be recast. The counsel for the defendant no.17 also agrees for the same. In view thereof, Mr.Dwarkadas states that plaintiffs do not see any reason to lead any further evidence. Stand over to 2.12.2016.

(K.R.SHRIRAM,J) KJ