Bombay High Court
NCM SHOAVA ENGINEERS (PVT.) LTD. AND ANRversusHYDROTEK ENGINEERS THROUGH PARTNER S. R. BHAT AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The trial court's order granting conditional leave to defend, subject to deposit of the principal claim amount, is upheld.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the order of the Sixth Joint Civil Judge, Pune, which granted the defendant conditional leave to defend subject to depositing the full principal claim of Rs. 17,26,055. The court examined an email dated 7 December 2016 in which the defendant admitted an intention to clear the outstanding dues and sought a payment schedule, without raising any quality issues about the supplied parts. The petitioner’s attempt to contest the quality of the parts was deemed unsupported by the email evidence. Consequently, the trial court’s discretion to grant conditional leave was found proper, and there was no ground for interference. The writ petition was therefore dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court erred in granting conditional leave to defend the defendant.
- Whether the email dated 7 December 2016 constitutes an admission of liability sufficient to justify the conditional leave.
- Whether the petitioner can raise quality‑of‑goods issues not reflected in the email.
- Whether the requirement to deposit the entire principal claim amount is appropriate.
Subjects
- writ petition
- conditional leave to defend
- admission of liability
- deposit of claim amount
- civil procedure
- trial court discretion
- quality of goods
Judgment
Renuka Thakur 3-WP-954-2020.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 954 OF 2020
Ncm Shoava Engineers (Pvt.) Ltd. and ...Petitioners
Anr
V/s.
Hydrotek Engineers Through Partner S. ...Respondents
R. Bhat and Anr
________________
Mr. Abhishek Bhat a/w Mr. Amit Karle and Mr. Sameer Tiwari i/b S. K.
Legal Associates LLP for Petitioners.
Mr. Anurag R. Mishra a/w Mr. Nikhil Dongre for Respondent No. 1.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026.
P.C.:
1) The Petitioner challenges order dated 17 October 2019
passed by the sixth Joint Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune allowing
Application at Exh-18 taken out by the Petitioner/Defendant seeking
leave to defend.
2) I have heard Mr. Bhat, the learned counsel appearing for
Petitioners and Mr. Mishra, the learned counsel appearing for
Respondents and have considered the submissions canvassed by them.
Page No.1 of 2
28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Renuka Thakur 3-WP-954-2020.docx
3) Perusal of email dated 7 December 2016 sent by the
Defendant to the Plaintiff contains a clear admission that the Defendant
was intending to clear off the outstanding dues. Defendant apparently
requested for working out a schedule for clearing of the outstanding
dues. The email dated 7 December 2016 was issued in response to
Plaintiff’s threat vide email dated 3 December 2016 not to offer further
parts on account of pendency of outstanding dues. Thus, there appears
to be some admission of liability on the part of the Defendant to clear off
the pending dues of the Plaintiff.
4) The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has sought
to raise issues about the quality of the parts supplied. However, atleast in
the email dated 7 December 2016, no such issues were flagged by the
Defendant. Considering the above position, grant of conditional leave by
the Trial Court subject to deposit the entire principal claim amount of
Rs. 17,26,055/- appears to be in order. There is no warrant for
interference in the impugned order.
5) Writ Petition is accordingly rejected.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: Renuka S Thakur
Page No.2 of 2
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Date: 29/09/2026 18:56:03
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.