Skip to main content
Court Order

Interim Order 2

CNR MHCC01000844201809 Dec 2020
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Interim Order 2 · 09 Dec 2020 · CNR MHCC010008442018

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: MHCC010008442018
CNR NO. MHCC010008442018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI
ORDER BELOW EXH.18
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 527 OF 2017
IN
SUIT NO.2266 OF 1994
Shri Tulshiram Shivaji Sonawane ]
(Deleted Since Deceased) through ]
his Legal Heirs ]
1. Ramesh T. Sonawane & Four Ors. ]...Applicants/
Org. Plaintiff.
V/s.
Girjappa Raoji Hotkar ]
(Deleted Since Deceased) ]
through his Legal Heirs ]
1. Smt. Sulochana G. Hotkar & Anr. ]...Respondents
Org. Defendants.
Appearance:
Advocate Mr. Ravindra Singh for the Applicant.
Advocate Mr. Yash Joglekar for the plaintiff.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR
(C.R.No.20)
DATE : 9th DECEMBER, 2020.
-- 1 of 7 --
- 2 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant / Original plaintiff filed this application for
grant of police protection.
2. In brief, it is contention of the applicants/ Original
plaintiff that the said Execution is filed for execution of Judgment
and Decree dated 20.08.2016. The said Judgment and decree is
confirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court as per the order dated
19.04.2018 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as per order
dated 31.08.2018. This Court has passed order and directed to issue
warrant of possession against defendants to execute decree. On
23.01.2020 bailiff had been to the spot to execute decree by warrant
of possession but defendants resisted and did not hand over
possession of the suit premises. Therefore, grant Police protection
from Local police station i.e. Shahunagar Police Station, Dharavi,
Mumbai – 400 017 to help the bailiff to execute warrant of
possession and to hand over possession of the suit premises as per the
decree.
3. I have heard the Learned Advocate appearing for the
original plaintiff. Perused record. Judgment Debtor / defendants
had filed an application Exh.15 on 28.11.2019 for adjournment. The
said application is rejected on the same date by hearing both the
parties and by passing detailed order.
4. Perused Order passed below Exh.01 dated 28.11.2019.
As per the said order it is directed to issue writ of possession under
-- 2 of 7 --
- 3 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
Order 21 Rule 35 of C.P.C. on required process fee to hand over
possession of the suit premises to the plaintiffs as per decree passed
dated 20.08.2016 in S.C. Suit No.2266/2004.
5. One Applicant Mrs. Shubhangi Raju Hotkar had filed
Chamber Summons No.199 of 2020 to record the obstruction caused
by her and to pass appropriate order restraining the decree holder
from disturbing the possession of the applicant in respect of the
premises being Tennary No.21, situated at Palkar Chawl, Dharavi
Cross Road, Dharavi, Mumbai – 400 017 save and except by
following due process of law. After hearing both the sides, the said
Chamber Summons is disposed of by order dated 18.02.2020. The
said Chamber Summons is rejected. The Operative Order of the Said
Chamber Summons runs as under:
“ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 199 of 2020 is rejected.
2. At this stage Ld Adv for applicant states that this
order be stayed for a one week as applicant want to
challenge this order. The Ld Adv for plaintiff states
that this order can not be stayed. I am opinion that
the C/s is rejected, therefore there is no question of
granting stay. Hence, oral prayer for granting stay of
this order is rejected.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 18/02/2020 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI”
-- 3 of 7 --
- 4 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
6. The instant application Exh.18 was filed on 18.02.2020.
After hearing plaintiffs advocate application Exh.18 was posted for
order on 09.03.2020. On 09.03.2020 the Learned Advocate for
applicant Mrs. Shubhangi Hotkar filed application Exh.18 for
adjournment contending that the applicant preferred the Writ
Petition No.1796 of 2020 against the order passed in Chamber
Summons No.199 of 2020 dated 18.02.2020 in the Hon'ble High
Court. He had submitted on 09.03.2020 before the Court that
applicant Shubhangi Hotkar is going to press for stay before the
Hon'ble High Court on 13.03.2020. Thereafter, matter adjourned for
order on the present application Exh.18 on 18.03.2020. Thereafter,
time to time matter adjourned because of Coronavirus (COVID-19)
pandemic.
7. As per contention raised in the Chamber Summons 199
of 2020 applicant therein Shubhangi Raju Hotkar came with case
that she is in possession of the suit premises and therefore to restrain
the Decree Holder from disturbing her possession in any manner. As
per detailed order passed in the said Chamber Summons the
contention of the applicant Mr. Shubhangi Hotkar is not accepted to
restrain the Decree Holder as prayed.
8. Para No.8 of Order passed in Chamber Summon No.199
of 2020 dated 18.02.2020 runs as under:
“ORDER
1. Chamber Summons No. 199 of 2020 is rejected.
2. At this stage Ld Adv for applicant states that this order be stayed
for a one week as applicant want to challenge this order. The Ld Adv
for plaintiff states that this order can not be stayed. I am opinion that
-- 4 of 7 --
- 5 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
the C/s is rejected, therefore there is no question of granting stay.
Hence, oral prayer for granting stay of this order is rejected.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 18/02/2020 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
9. Perused copy of the bailiff report dated 23.01.2020
which is annexed with this application Exh.18. The concerned bailiff
mentioned therein that he had been to the suit premises to execute
decree by handing over the possession of the suit premises to the
plaintiff on 23.23.2020 at 10.30 a.m. He went there with plaintiff
No.1 Ramesh Tulsiram Sonawane. One Smt. Sulochana Girjappa
Hotkar i.e. defendant No.1 was at the suit premises. Defendant No.2
Raoji Girijappa Hotkar was not present. Smt.Sulochana Girijappa
Hotkar i.e. defendant No.1 refused to vacate the suit premises.
Therefore, he could not execute writ of possession.
10. Perused para No.14 of Order passed in Chamber
Summon No.199 of 2020 dated 18.02.2020. It runs as under:
“14 The said S.C. Suit No.2266 of 2004 is disposed of by
Judgment dated 20.08.2016. The Operative Order passed in the said
S.C. Suit No.2266 of 2004 runs as under:
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with cost.
2. Defendants are hereby directed to hand over vacant
possession of the suit premises to the plaintiff within one
month from the date of this order.
3. Decree be drawn accordingly.
Dated 20/08/2006 Judge”
-- 5 of 7 --
- 6 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
11. Perused Section 151 of C.P.C. Inherent powers under
Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure can be used to execute the
decree to hand over the possession of the suit premises to plaintiff by
granting police protection. Hence following Hence following order:
ORDER
Application Ex.18 for grant of police protection is allowed as under-
1. Shahu Nagar police station at Dharavi, Mumbai 400017 is hereby
directed to provide required police personnels as per rule to the
bailiff to execute decree passed in Suit No. 2266 of 2004 as per
judgment dated 20-08-2016 to hand over possession of the suit
premisses i.e. Tannary No. 21 situated at Palkar Chawl, Dharavi Cross
road, Dharavi, Mumbai 400017 to the plaintiffs.
2. Issue fresh writ of possession under Order 21 Rule 35 of C.P.C. on
required process fee to handover possession of the suit premises to
the plaintiffs as per decree passed dated 20-08-2016 in S.C.Suit No.
2266 of 2004.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
Dt.: 09/12/2020 City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
Dictated on : 09/12/2020.
Transcribed on : 17/12/2020.
Draft given on : 17/12/2020
Checked on : 18/12/2020
Signed on : 18/12/2020.
( SHANKAR G. BORLEPWAR )
Judge, (C.R.No.20)
City Civil Court, Gr. MUMBAI
-- 6 of 7 --
- 7 - O.B.EXH.18 in Execution
Appln.527-2017
“CERTIFIED TOBE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
18.12.2020 at 05.12 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(VARSHA U. PAWAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge HHJ SHRI S. G.
BORLEPWAR
(COURT ROOM NO.20)
Date of pronouncement of judgment/order 09.12.2020
Judgment/order signed by P.O. on 18.12.2020
Judgment/order uploaded on 18.12.2020
-- 7 of 7 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.