Full Order Text
Order 1 · 17 Apr 2018 · CNR MHCC010021942018
Order Details: Notice of Motion Pdf Text: :1: IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1499 OF 2018 IN S.C. SUIT NO. 820 OF 2018 Shrikant Ghanshaym Shah ) Plaintiff. Versus. Ketan Ghanshaym Shah ) Defendant. Adv. Rajni Thorat, for Plaintiff. Adv. Bhatia for Defendant. CORAM : Dinesh P. Surana Court Room No.1 DATED : 17.04.2018. ORAL ORDER The present Notice of Motion is taken out by the plaintiff, who is real brother of the defendant, for grant of temporary injunction against the defendant not to create third party right in Flat No.501 (more specifically described in suit and Notice of Motion hereinafter referred to as Suit Flat No.501) and or restraining the defendant from interfering, disturbing exclusive possession of the plaintiff in respect of suit premises and/or to demolish common wall in suit flat Nos.501 and 502. 2. Heard advocate Chouhan for the plaintiff and Advocate Bhatia for defendant. Perused Notice of Motion and supporting affidavit filed by the plaintiff. Also perused affidavit in reply to Notice of Motion filed by the defendant and supporting affidavit of parents of the plaintiff and defendant supporting to the contention of defendant. Also perused -- 1 of 4 -- :2: pleadings of the plaintiff in the plaint. 3. At the outset, I would like to mention here that the plaintiff not pressed all the prayers in Notice of Motion except prayer of temporary injunction against the defendant not to create third party right in respect of suit flat No.501. 4. Advocate for plaintiff submitted that flat No.501 is owned and possessed by the plaintiff. At present the plaintiff is residing in Japan. There is apprehension of the plaintiff that the defendant his brother may create third party right in suit premises. As such, he prayed for allowing Notice of Motion to the extent of relief pressed. 5. As against this advocate defendant submitted that the plaintiff has not come with clear hand in the suit. No case is made out by the plaintiff for grant of relief pressed. She submitted that the defendant is not disputing the ownership and possession of the plaintiff over suit flat. The defendant is residing in adjacent flat No.502 and allegations made against the defendant are baseless. She submitted that relief is sought by the plaintiff on the ground that financial condition of the defendant is not well and if, injunction is granted it will malign the status of the defendant. She submitted that the plaintiff has not substantiated his contention by filing any document and affidavit. Therefore, she prayed for rejection of Notice of Motion with exemplary costs. 6. The defendant is not disputing the ownership and possession of the plaintiff over the suit flat. As per the plaintiff, at present he is not residing in India. On perusal of the pleadings, it seems, that it is -- 2 of 4 -- :3: alleged, that there is possibility of creation of third party right in suit premises by his brother, who is residing adjacent. Without going into the aspect as to whether the plaintiff has proved the financial condition of the defendant, I am of the view, that in such circumstances where there are inter say dispute between the parties and defendant is not disputing the ownership and possession over suit premises of the plaintiff, no prejudice, will be caused to the defendant if, he is ordered to be restrained not to create third party right in suit premises. The apprehension of the plaintiff, who is at present residing abroad, of creation of third party interest in the suit premises by the defendant is not mere bald statement. He has given statement that he was being informed that suit premises was being shown through broker by the defendant. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that to the extent of relief pressed by the plaintiff, injunction as prayed can be granted which will not prejudice either to the status of the defendant or to his reputation. Therefore following order is passed. ORDER Plaintiff's Notice of Motion is made absolute. The defendant is temporarily restrained, pending the suit, not to create any third party interest in suit property flat No.501 located at Dun Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, 225/227, Javji Dadji Road, Tardeo, Mumbai 400 007. Other prayer (a) and (c) not pressed hence rejected. No order as to costs. (D. P. Surana) Judge City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay Dictated on : 17.04.2018. Transcribed on : 21.04.2018 HHJ signed on : 23.04.2018 -- 3 of 4 -- :4: “CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE & CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.” 23.04.2018 02.55 p.m. Mr.Vishnu S. Shinde UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.) HHJ Shri D.P. Surana (C.R.No.01) Date of pronouncement of Judgment/ order 17.04.2018 Judgment/Order signed by the P.O. on 23.04.2018 Judgment/Order uploaded on 23.04.2018 -- 4 of 4 --
