Megha 61_cra_506_2018.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.506 OF 2018 KK Construction ...Applicant V/s. Sai Rama Engineering Company ...Respondent ______________ Mr. Gandhar Raikar (through VC) for the Applicant. ______________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 27 NOVEMBER 2025. P.C.: 1) Revision Application challenges order dated 17 April 2017 passed by the learned Ad-hoc Judge, City Civil Court, Borivali Division-Dindoshi, Mumbai, rejecting the Summons for Judgment dated 67 of 2017. 2) I have gone through the affidavit-in-reply filed to oppose Summons for Judgment. The averments made in the affidavit-in-reply would clearly indicate denial of liability to pay any amount to the Plaintiff. The Defendant has also raised several defences which the Trial Court has held to be triable. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the Applicant that out of claimed amount of Rs.22,00,000/-, Defendant has disputed only the amount of Rs.9,49,255/- appears to be incorrect. The Defendant has raised several disputes in the affidavit-in-reply, which need to be considered at the Page No. 1 of 2 27 November 2025 2025:BHC-AS:51808 Megha 61_cra_506_2018.docx time of trial of the Suit. Summons for Judgment has rightly been rejected. Even otherwise, the Suit has progressed substantially and is at the stage of cross-examination of the Plaintiff’s witness. I am therefore not inclined to interfere in the impugned order. 3) Civil Revision Application is accordingly rejected. 4) Needless to observe that the Suit shall be decided on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in the order. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 2 of 2 27 November 2025 Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 28/11/2025 12:43:41