Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1
MHCC010015572019
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT, AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.611 OF 2019
IN
SUIT NO.211 OF 2019
Ms. Fatimabi Mumtaz Ali Qureshi ..........Plaintiff
V/s.
1. M/s. Mithila Developers
2. Mrs. Zaibunissa Mumtazali Qureshi ......... Defendants
CORAM : HIS HONOUR ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI. R.R. KHAN
CITY CIVIL COURT, GR. BOMBAY
C.R.No..
: 21
DATE : 15.07.2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appearances :-
Advocate Slegha R h/f Advocate Ashok Sarogi for plaintiff.
Advocate Darpan Jain for defendant No.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORAL ORDER
Through this, Notice of Motion the plaintiff has applied for
relief of declaration that she is entitled for alternate accommodation
and compensation. The plaintiff also requested for issuance of
mandatory direction to defendant No.1 for entering the agreement
-- 1 of 5 --
2
with the plaintiff for grant of permanent alternate premises and
payment of compensation.
2. According to plaintiff, she filed suit for declaration and
permanent injunction. It is case of plaintiff that her mother was in
possession of property in question and plaintiff was also in
possession, however, she has been dispossessed by defendant No.1. It
is grievance of plaintiff that defendant No.1 has obtained consent
from the plaintiff and possess the documents. It is apprehension of
the plaintiff that in the event of failure of defendant No.1 to
incorporate her name in Annexure II, she will suffer great loss.
Accordingly, she has requested to issue directions to the defendant
No.1 for entering in necessary agreement with her and for declaration
that she has entitled for alternate accommodation.
3. The defendant No.1 strongly opposed this notice of motion by
filing independent reply. It is contended that plaintiff is not entitled
for declaration for alternate permanent accommodation as well as
mandatory direction for execution of agreement. It is contended that
plaintiff is seeking interim reliefs which are of final nature and if it is
considered it will result in decree of the suit without trial. The
defendant No.1 annexed various documents and consent given by
mother of plaintiff in its favour. The defendant No.1 requested for
dismissal of the notice of motion.
4. Afterwards, the defendant No.1 filed additional affidavit
wherein it is informed by defendant No.1 that the appointment of the
defendant No.1 has been terminated by the Municipal Authority by
order dated 17.01.2022. It is submitted that now defendant No.1 is
-- 2 of 5 --
3
not concerned with the project. It is contended that due to
termination of mandate of defendant No.1, the cause of action
against defendant No.1 does not survive. It is requested that notice of
motion be dismissed. In support of this statement, defendant No.1
annexed copy of termination of defendant No.1 from the project.
5. Responding the additional affidavit of defendant No.1, plaintiff
preferred her response and submitted that the services of defendant
No.1 have been terminated by the office of BMC. However, it is
contended that the defendant is still a party in the suit and relief can
be granted against defendant No.1.
6. I perused notice of motion, reply, additional affidavit and reply.
I perused the written submissions of the plaintiff. I heard Ld.
Advocate for defendant No.1 at length.
7. Significantly, plaintiff has sought relief of declaration and
mandatory injunction which appears to be similar as prayed in the
plaint. No doubt grant of permanent alternate premises cannot be
afforded summarily and it is the competent authority which is
empowered to consider the claim of plaintiff on the basis of
established norms. In such situation without legal evidence and trial
consideration of relief of declaration will amount the decree of the
suit without trial. Likewise, the defendant No.1 has been terminated
from the said project, therefore, issuance of mandatory directions
against defendant No.1 have become infructuous. Summing up, the
plaintiff has not made out the emergent and exigent circumstances
for considering her prayers without trial. Accordingly, the request of
the plaintiff cannot be considered at this juncture. Hence, I am
-- 3 of 5 --
4
satisfied to consider this notice of motion without sufficient reasons
and premature requiring to be dismissed. Hence, following order :-
ORDER
1. Notice of motion No.611 of 2019 is dismissed.
2. Notice of motion stands disposed of accordingly.
(Pronounced in open Court)
Date : 15.07.2026 (R.R. Khan)
Mumbai. Judge, City Civil Court,
Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on computer : 15.07.2026.
Finalized on : 15.07.2026.
Signed on : 15.07.2026.
-- 4 of 5 --
5
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
15.07.2026 05.30 p.m.
NAME OF TYPIST
MADHURI S. WARKHADE
Name of the Judge
(With Court room No.)
HHJ Shri. R.R. Khan
(C.R. No.21)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
15.07.2026
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
15.07.2026
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
15.07.2026
-- 5 of 5 --