Order 1

Order Details: Ex-parte Judgement
Pdf Text: S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 1 Ex-parte judgment
MHCC010014922018
Presented on 29012018
Registered on 12022018
Decided on 19012024
Duration Yrs. M. Days
05 11 21
CNR no. MHCC010014922018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
S.C. SUIT NO. 429 OF 2018
Exhibit No.15
1. Nitin Subhash Gole
Aged about 40 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
223, Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
2. Bharat Baban Gole
Aged about 56 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
223, Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
3. Sagar Nivruti Jagtap
Aged about 33 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
4. Nilesh Vinayak Jagtap
Aged about 40 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
-- 1 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 2 Ex-parte judgment
Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
5. Shivaji Babanrao Atkari
Aged about 40 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
223, Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
6. Ramesh Vinayak Jagtap
Aged about 43 years, Occ. : service,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070.
7. Namdev Krishna Jagtap
Aged about 73 years, Occ. : Retired,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at
Mahur Gala, Koyanabai Chawl,
Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai400 070. ... Plaintiffs
V/s.
Shankar Ganpat Kumbhar 2 Shirwalkar
Aged about 79 years, Occu. : Retired,
Indian Inhabitant, Residing at & Post
Mahur, Tal. Parandhar, Dist. Pune. ... Defendant
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI N.G.SHUKLA
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR.BOMBAY
(C.R. NO.29).
DATE : 19/01/2024.
-- 2 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 3 Ex-parte judgment
Appearance :
Ld. Advocate Shri. A.B. Shinde for the plaintiff.
Exparte against the defendant.
J U D G M E N T
1. Plaintiffs have filed this suit for permanent injunction.
Brief facts of the plaintiffs’ case are stated as below
2. Tenanted Room No.6, Hajrabai Chawl, Ramesh Karkar
Lane, Takiyawar, Kurla (West), Mumbai is the subject matter of the suit
(hereinafter referred to as “Suit Premises”). Plaintiffs and defendant
are original resident of Village Mahur, Post Mahur, Tal. Purandar, Dist.
Pune. They were gainfully employed and working in Textile Mills,
Mumbai. Plaintiffs have formed and organization namely “Gramastha
Mandal Mahur”. In or about 1960, the villagers of Mahur were not
having permanent residents at Mumbai. Though, some of them were
working in Textile Mills, hence they had decided to purchase residential
premises in Mumbai for the joint use and occupation of villagers of
Mahur. Therefore, they formed “Gramastha Mandal” and taken on rent
one room at Koyanabai Chawl, Sarveshwar Mandir Marg, Takiyaward,
Kurla (W), Mumbai. There were more than 100 to 110 persons
employed in Mumbai and said room was falling short for their
residence, hence they additionally taken on rent the suit premises on
'Pagdi' basis. The consideration of suit premises was contributed by
collecting fund by all the plaintiffs. The suit premises is taken in the
name of defendant and the landlord started issuing rent receipt in the
name of defendant as he was senior member and all the other members
agreed to issue rent receipt in his name. Though, the rent receipt was in
-- 3 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 4 Ex-parte judgment
the name of defendant, but all the plaintiffs are in possession of suit
premises. They were residing in the suit premises. Thus, the defendant
have no any individual right, title and interest in the suit premises.
3. It is further contended that, due to strike and closure of
Textile Mills, some of the plaintiffs and defendant permanently shifted
to their native place i.e. Mahur. Tal. Purandhar, Dist. Pune. In the year
2009, plaintiffs were not required the suit premises for their occupation,
hence it was given to one Vikas Ranawat for residence on leave and
licence basis. Some of the plaintiffs are still residing in the suit
premises. In the meantime on 16.01.2018, defendant called upon
plaintiff no.1 and claimed his right in the suit premises on the basis of
rent receipt and claimed his possession. He threatened plaintiff to break
open the lock of suit premises and forcefully take possession thereof.
Again on 17.01.2018 and 20.01.2018, plaintiff came at suit premises
and tried to take possession of suit premises forcefully. Hence, plaintiffs
have filed present suit for permanent injunction restraining defendant
from dispossessing the plaintiff from suit premises or taking forceful
possession of the suit premises.
4. Despite due service of writ of summons, defendant failed to
appear in the suit. Hence, the suit is proceeded exparte against
defendant.
5. On behalf of plaintiffs, plaintiff No.1 adduced evidence of
affidavit at Exh.5. Plaintiffs relied on documents such as Rationi card at
Exh.9, Aadhar card at Exh.10, Voter ID card of two plaintiffs at Exh.11,
Driving licence of plaintiff No.1 at Exh.12, three leave and licence
agreement at Exh.13.
-- 4 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 5 Ex-parte judgment
6. I have heard Ld. Advocate Shri. A.B. Shinde for the
plaintiff.
7. In view of the pleadings of the plaintiff, following points
arose for my determination and findings with reasons thereon are
stated as below:
Sr.No. Points Findings
1 Whether plaintiffs prove that the suit
premises in their lawful possession ? In the affirmative.
2 Whether plaintiffs prove that
defendant is dispossessing their
possession over the suit premises ?
In the affirmative.
3. Whether plaintiffs are entitled for
relief of permanent injunction ? In the affirmative.
4. What order? As per final order
REASONS
As to point nos.1 to 4 :
8. Affidavit of evidence of plaintiff No.1 at Exh.5 is replica of
plaint. He has stated that, the suit premises is taken on rent on 'Pagdi'
basis by all the plaintiffs i.e. members of “Gramastha Mandal Mahur”
for their residence. He has also stated that, suit premises was taken in
the name of defendant and the rent receipt was issued in his name.
Plaintiffs are residing in the suit premises. is said contention is
corroborated by Ration card of plaintiff No.1 and Aadhar card of
plaintiffs No.1, 3 and 7. Plaintiffs also filed Voter ID card and Driving
licence of plaintiff No.1. Residential address on these documents is of
the suit premises. Three leave and licence agreement at Exh.13 shows
-- 5 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 6 Ex-parte judgment
that plaintiffs are in possession of suit premises and they had executed
leave and licence agreement and given the same to Vikas Ranawat for
residence for period of 12.01.2009 to 11.12.2009, 04.01.2010 to
03.11.2010 and 01.01.2011 to 30.11.2011. Plaintiff No.1 has also
stated on oath that defendant No.1 is trying to dispossess their
possession over the suit premises. The oral and documentary evidence
of plaintiff is remained unrebutted as the suit is proceeded exparte
against defendant. I have no reason to disbelieve the same. Plaintiffs
have proved their lawful possession over the suit premises by oral and
documentary evidence. Hence, I hold that, plaintiffs are entitled for
permanent injunction as claimed. I answer points No.1 to 3 in the
affirmative. Suit deserves to be decreed. In answer to point No.4, I pass
following order :
ORDER
1. Suit is decreed with costs.
2. Defendant is hereby permanently restrained from
obstructing the possession of plaintiffs over the suit premises and
dispossessing them from suit premises.
3. Decree be drawn up accordingly.
(N.G. Shukla)
Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Greater Bombay.
Date :19.01.2024
1. Dictated on : 19.01.2024
2. Transcribed on : 19.01.2024
3. Checked and Signed on : 22.01.2024
4. Delivered to Certified :
Copy Section on
-- 6 of 7 --
S.C.Suit No.429/2018. 7 Ex-parte judgment
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
22.01.2024 3.22 p.m. Mrs. Shravanti Karre
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri N.G. Shukla
(Court Room No.29).
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order 19.01.2024
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 22.01.2024
Judgment/Order uploaded on 22.01.2024
-- 7 of 7 --