Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: ORDER ..1..
MHCC010030292020
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1064 OF 2020
IN
S.C. SUIT NO. 911 OF 2020
Mahendra Dhanpal Yadav. ...Plaintiff.
Versus
Geeta Ramesh Benbanshi. … Defendant.
Appearance:
Adv. Asit Singh for plaintiff.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
R.R.Patare
COURT NO.2
DATED : 23rd January, 2023
ORAL ORDER
Perused pleading, evidence and heard advocate for plaintiff. The
advocate for defendant absent when called repeatedly. This notice of
motion is taken out by the plaintiff for order of injunction restraining
the defendant from dispossessing the plaintiff. According to plaintiff one
Maniram Ayodhya Benbanshi was owner of suit room. The aforesaid
Maniram Ayodhya Benbanshi sold his rights in the suit room in favour
of Priti Devi Benbanshi. Thereafter the aforesaid Priti Devi Benbanshi
transferred right interest in the suit room in favour of plaintiff under
agreement dated 13.12.2019. The agreement for sale, affidavit and
power of attorney executed by Priti Devi in favour of plaintiff are
brought on record at Exh. A to C. The plaintiff has also produced on
record copy of electricity bill issued in his name on the address of suit
room. The copy of agreement executed between Maniram Ayodhya
-- 1 of 3 --
ORDER ..2..
Benbanshi and Priti Devi Benbanshi is also brought on record. Copy of
photo pass in the name of Maniram Ayodhya Benbanshi are also
brought on record. The documentary evidence on record prima facie
shows the possession of plaintiff in the suit room.
2. The defendant filed reply to the notice of motion. It is the defence
of defendant that Smt. Pyaridevi Benbanshi has executed power of
attorney in favour of the defendant and authorize her to manage the
suit premises in her absence. It is alleged that Smt. Priti Devi Benbanshi
was harassing the defendant on the ground that defendant was
supporting Pyaridevi Maniram Benbanshi. In short the defendant also
claims her right on the basis of power of attorney executed in her favour
by Pyaridevi Benbanshi. From the record it is seen that Pyaridevi
Maniram Benbanshi is the wife of Maniram Ayodhya Benbanshi from
whom Priti Devi Benbanshi had purchased the suit premises. The
plaintiff has produced on record prima facie documentary evidence to
suggest his possession in the suit premises. There is threat to the
possession of plaintiff, therefore, in case of refusal to grant injunction in
favour of plaintiff, the plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss. There is
possibility of dispossess. Hence, the balance of conveyance lies in favour
of plaintiff. In the result, following order is passed.
ORDER
1. The defendant is hereby restrained from causing obstruction and
interference in the lawful possession of plaintiff in the suit premises till
the decision of suit.
2. No order as to costs.
(R.R. Patare)
Judge
City Civil Court, Gr.Mumbai
Date : 23.01.2023
Typed on : 23.01.2023
HHJ signed on : 23.01.2023
-- 2 of 3 --
ORDER ..3..
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
DATED 23.01.2023, 5.30 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME Mrs. V. N. Rajgole.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
H.H.J. Shri. R.R. Patare.
C.R.No.02
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
23.01.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O.
on
23.01.2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 23.01.2023
-- 3 of 3 --