Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: Draft NM. : 1 : SUIT NO.358/2018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER BOMBAY
DRAFT NOTICE OF MOTION
IN
SUIT NO. 358 OF 2018.
FOODLINK RESTAURANTS (INDIA)PVT.LTD... } .. Plaintiff.
Versus.
Municipal Corporation of }
Greater Mumbai & Ors... } .. Defendants.
Advocate Mr. Shailesh Rai for Plaintiff.
Advocate Mrs. Chavan for Defendant /BMC.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. G.B.GURAO
DATE : 15 TH FEBRUARY, 2018.
(Court Room No.06)
O R D E R
1. Plaintiff has taken out this draft notice of motion, against
defendants, restraining them from taking any action on the basis of
order dated 11/01/2018.
2. Plaintiff is Private Limited Company under the name and style of
"Foodlink Restaurants (India) Pvt. Ltd." Defendant No. 1 is the
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and defendant Nos. 3 to 5
are the officers of defendant No.1. Plaintiff has obtained the necessary
permissions from the defendant/Corporation to run business. Thus,
plaintiff has abided all the rules and regulations. According to plaintiff,
defendants have no right to close the restaurant of the plaintiff.
However, on 11/01/2018, the defendant issued a notice to the
plaintiff, directing to fulfill certain conditions. Defendants also directed
the plaintiff to comply the fire safety measures. Defendant threatened
the plaintiff on failure of the plaintiff, they will close the business of the
-- 1 of 4 --
Draft NM. : 2 : SUIT NO.358/2018
plaintiff. Thus, plaintiff prayed to grant adinterimprotection.
3. Notice is served on the defendant.
4. I have heard Shri. Shailesh Rai advocate for plaintiff and Smt.
Valvi advocate for defendants.
5. Shri. Shailesh Rai advocate for plaintiff has invited my attention
towards documents. According to him, all the necessary permissions
are taken by the plaintiff. Therefore, defendant have no authority to
close the business of the plaintiff. The notice is illegal and therefore,
prayed to grant the relief.
6. As against this, Smt. Valvi advocate for defendant has submitted
that plaintiff has not applied to the Fire Brigade Department of the
Corporation and did not obtain the necessary NOC's. She further
submitted that plaintiff may be directed to apply to the defendant and
obtain NOC.
7. From the record, it reveals that plaintiff is a Pvt. Ltd . Company.
Plaintiff runs hotel business in the suit premises. It appears that
plaintiff has obtained the necessary licenses from the Competent
Authorities. I have perused the impugned notice. The defendant/Fire
Brigade, directed the plaintiff to comply the fire safety measures.
Therefore, in such a circumstances, it is necessary to direct the plaintiff
to file an application for compliance of fire safety measures and it is
also necessary to direct the defendant not to act upon the impugned
notice. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I pass the following
-- 2 of 4 --
Draft NM. : 3 : SUIT NO.358/2018
order :
O r d e r
1. The defendant, their agent, servant or anybody
on behalf of them are hereby temporarily
restrained from taking any action on the basis of
notice dated 11/01/2018.
2. Plaintiff is directed to file the application
before defendant/Corporation and thereafter
defendant/Corporation shall act according to
law.
3. The order shall be enforce till next date.
4. Notice of Motion be registered.
Date : 15.02.2018. (G.B.Gurao)
Judge,
City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Dictated on : 15.02.2018
Typed on : 15.02.2018
Signed by HHJ. : 15.02.2018
-- 3 of 4 --
Draft NM. : 4 : SUIT NO.358/2018
“ CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
15.02.2018 /5.30 p.m. Mr. S.D.Nalawade
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
(H.G.)
Name of the Judge (with
Court Room No.)
Shri. G.B.Gurao
(CR.No.06)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
15.02.2018
JUDGEMENT/ORDER signed
by P.O. on
15.02.2018
JUDGEMENT/ORDER
uploaded on
15.02.2018 .
-- 4 of 4 --