Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: MHCC010008002020 Presented on 18/01/2020
Registered on 18/01/2020
Decided on 26/02/2026
Duration 06Y/01M/08D
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT, AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.314 OF 2020
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.989 OF 2019
Santosh Ambaji Kamble …. Plaintiff
Versus
1. Kusum Ambaji Kamble (Deleted)
2. Sunil Ambaji Barshikar & Anr. …. Defendants
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE N.V. JIWANE
C.R.NO..
: 62.
DATE : 26.02.2026.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adv. V. R.Tripathi for plaintiff.
None for Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ORAL ORDER
(DICTATED IN OPEN COURT)
1. The present notice of motion has been taken out by
plaintiff for restraining the defendants from interfering with the
possession of the plaintiff over the suit property. It is the contention of
plaintiff that in the year 2010 original building viz., ‘Elevia Building’
was demolished by the landlord and present building known as Shreeji
Villa was reconstructed. Earlier to the demolition of the said building
-- 1 of 5 --
..2.. NM 314/20 in SU 989/19
plaintiff and defendant No.1 were only residing the in the said building
and for the development of said old building landlord and developer
entered into an agreement with the plaintiff and defendant no.1. The
landlord and developer entered into an agreement with plaintiff and
defendant No.1 on 04/05/2012 and thereby agreed to provide them
jointly suit premises i.e. Flat no.1203, 12th Floor, Shreeji Villa CHS Ltd.,
C.S.No.549, Final Plot No.550, TPS III of Mahim Division, T.H. Kataria
Marg, Manmala Tank Road Junction, Matunga Road (W.R.) Mumbai
400 016. It is the contention of the plaintiff that plaintiff and defendant
No.1 were also paid jointly the rent of alternate accommodation by the
Developer. After the construction of new building the suit property was
given in possession of plaintiff and defendant No.1 jointly. It is the
contention of plaintiff that as the defendant No.1 was having no source
of income and therefore it was the plaintiff who was making all the
payments of maintenance charges to the society, electricity bill and so
also maintaining defendant no.1. It is further contention of plaintiff that
defendant No.2 is the brother of plaintiff and defendant No.3 is the
married sister of plaintiff. Defendant No.3 since beginning residing at
Kolhapur and used to do his job at Surat. While defendant No.3 is
married daughter living at her matrimonial house. Defendant No.2 and
3 are having no right for title over the suit property, but with an
intention to grab the suit premises defendant No.2 and 3 started
instigating defendant no.1 to sell the suit property and to give
defendant No.2 and 3 each 25% share in the sale consideration. It is
further alleged by the plaintiff that defendant No.2 and 3 in collusion
with defendant No.1 started lodging complaints at police station against
the plaintiff and his wife, only with an intent to pressurize the plaintiff
to sell the suit property. It is the contention of plaintiff that during the
pendency of suit defendant No.1 i.e. mother died and plaintiff is in
-- 2 of 5 --
..3.. NM 314/20 in SU 989/19
exclusive possession of the suit property and defendant No.2 and 3 are
trying to dispossess the plaintiff from the suit property. Hence, he
prayed to restrain defendant No.2 and 3 from interfering in the peaceful
enjoyment of the suit property by the plaintiff till the decision of the
suit.
2. Inspite of service of notice of motion to defendant No.2 and
3 they failed to appear and file any reply to the notice of motion taken
out by the plaintiff. Hence, there is no opposition to the notice of
motion by the plaintiff.
3. The plaintiff is seeking interim injunction under Order
XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure for restraining
defendants from interfering in the peaceful enjoyment of the suit
property. The plaintiff has filed on record documents showing the share
certificate of the suit flat was issued in favour of the plaintiff and his
mother Kusum jointly. It is the contention of the plaintiff that he alone
alongwith his family is residing in the suit property, whereas defendant
No.2 reside at Kolhapur and defendant no.2 resides at her matrimonial
house at Bhandup. Plaintiff is claiming his exclusive possession over the
suit property. In the absence of any opposition from the side of
defendants, the contention of plaintiff after going through the plaint
and documents filed on record needs to be accepted. As the plaintiff is
in possession of the suit flat and he is having apprehension that
defendant No.2 and 3 are trying to disturb his peaceful possession over
the suit property, therefore till the right of the parties are decided on
merit, the possession of plaintiff over the suit property needs to be
protected. Thus the plaintiff has established that he is having prima
facie case in his favour and balance of convenience also lies in his
-- 3 of 5 --
..4.. NM 314/20 in SU 989/19
favour. If the defendants will be succeeded in interfering with the
possession of plaintiff over the suit flat, then it will certainly cause grave
prejudice to plaintiff. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case
and in the interest of justice, I am of the considered opinion that the
notice of motion filed by the plaintiff needs to be allowed. Hence, I pass
the following order.
ORDER
1. Notice of motion No.314 of 2020 is allowed in respect
of prayer clause (a) of notice of motion.
2. Notice of motion No. 314 of 2020 is disposed of
accordingly.
Date : 26.02.2026
Place : Mumbai.
(N.V. JIWANE),
Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Greater Mumbai.
Dictated on : 26.02.2026.
Transcribed on : 26.02.2026.
Draft given on : 26.02.2026.
Checked on : 26.02.2026.
Signed on : 27.02.2026.
-- 4 of 5 --
..5.. NM 314/20 in SU 989/19
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
Mrs. Manisha S. Putta	25.02.2026 11.30 AM
Name of the Judge (With C.R. No.) HHJ Shri N.V. JIWANE (C.R.No. 62)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
26.02.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by P.O.
on
27.02.2026
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded on 27.02.2026
-- 5 of 5 --