Final Order 2

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: 1 NM 86519 in Suit St. No. 248519
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT AT MUMBAI.
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION No.865 of 2019
(CNR No.MHCC010022912019)
IN
SUIT STAMP NO.2485 OF 2019.
Shaikh Abdulla Ibrahim Shaikh & ors. }...PLAINTIFFS.
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Gr. Bombay Ors. }...DEFENDANTS.
Ms.Holmagi h/f. Shri.M.V.Holamagi, learned advocate for plaintiffs.
Shri.Ramchandani, learned advocate for defendant No. 4.
CORAM: HIS HONOUR JUDGE SHRI. P.P.RAJVAIDYA (C.R.NO.12)
O R A L O R D E R
(Delivered on 16/03/2019)
1. By filing this application, learned Advocate appearing for
the plaintiffs has prayed to continue the order dtd.02/03/2019 passed
in the matter by submitting that plaintiffs want to challenge the order
passed by this Court today in NM No.865 of 2019 vide which, said NM
is rejected. Learned advocate for defendant No.4 endorsed his say of
objection on the application itself. Nobody appeared defendant Nos.2
and 3 to contest the application.
2. Learned advocate for plaintiffs submitted that this court has
rejected the Notice of Motion No.865/2019 & plaintiffs want to
challenge the said order before Hon'ble High Court due to which, it is
necessary to continue the order dt.02/03/2019 for four weeks
otherwise, defendants will demolish the suit building & legitimate rights
of plaintiff to file appeal will be violated.
3. As against this, learned advocate for defendant No.4
vehemently opposed the application by submitting that redevelopment
-- 1 of 4 --
2 NM 86519 in Suit St. No. 248519
process has been stalled due to this false suit filed by the plaintiffs and
this Court has rejected the Notice of Motion on merits due to which, the
order dtd.02/03/2019 can not be continued any further. He argued that
other 130 occupants have already vacated their respective premises in
the building and they are waiting for the redevelopment by shifting in
the transit accommodations & if the process is stalled by continuing the
order dt.02/03/2019, it will cause prejudice to those other occupants.
He further argued that the building is in dangerous and dilapidated
condition on account of which also, earlier order can not be continued.
4. It can not be in dispute that the suit building is in
dilapidated condition & only hence, it is in the process of
redevelopment. Despite having knowledge of it, the plaintiffs are not
ready to vacate the suit building by contending that they are in
possession of the five suit premises described in the Plaint. This Court
has rejected the Notice of Motion of the plaintiffs earlier today on
merits however, it is an admitted fact that as per the orders passed
earlier, this court had directed that defendant Nos.2 to 4 shall not take
further steps in connection with notice issued u/s.95A of MHADA Act &
said order was in force till final decision of Notice of Motion. Though,
the Notice of Motion is now decided finally & is rejected on merits by
this court as per order passed earlier today, to my mind, it is necessary
to give opportunity to the plaintiffs to challenge the order of this court
by filing appeal and for that purpose, I am inclined to continue the
earlier order dt.02/03/2019 but I am not inclined to continue it for four
weeks as is prayed in this application. Interest of justice will be
protected if said order is continued for two weeks from today so as to
enable the plaintiffs to approach Hon'ble High Court for challenging the
order passed today by this court in NM but with a clarification that the
-- 2 of 4 --
3 NM 86519 in Suit St. No. 248519
staying in the building by the plaintiffs would be at their own risks.
5. So far as the prayer made to provide ordinary copy of the
order passed in NM today is concerned, it is already 5.50 pm now
hence, it is not possible to accept said prayer. Learned advocate for
plaintiffs requested to provide authenticate copy of today's Roznama.
Learned advocate for defendant No.4, at this stage, also requested that
authenticate copy of today's Roznama be provided to defendant No.4.
Those requests of learned advocates for plaintiffs & defendant No.4 are
accepted. Thus, an order.
O R D E R
Application is partly allowed as under.
Order dtd.02/03/2019 passed by this Court to continue for
a period of two weeks from today.
Authenticated copies of today's Roznama be given to the
plaintiffs and defendant No.4, as per rules.
Date: 16/03/2019. (P.P.RAJVAIDYA)
Direct dictated on : 16/03/2019. Judge, C.R.No.12,
Checked on : 16/03/2019. City Civil Court,
Signed on : 16/03/2019. Gr. Bombay.
-- 3 of 4 --
4 NM 86519 in Suit St. No. 248519
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER”
18/03/2019 at 11.40 am Mrs. Y.M. SAKHARKAR
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge(with CR No.) HHJ SHRI.P.P.RAJVAIDYA (CR No.12)
Date of pronouncement of Order 16/03/2019
Order signed by P.O. on 18/03/2019
Order uploaded on 18/03/2019
-- 4 of 4 --