Sohan Singh Dhami (Suit. St. No. 5027/VsDesignated Officer

Date: 21-10-2020
Business: Adv. Mr. P.D. Gandhy with Adv. Mr. Giriraj for the Plaintiff present
and tendered original NM No.1484/2020 along with Affidavit in
Support of NM.
He also tendered draft CH/S along with Affidavit in Support and
draft NM in said CH/S. along with Affidavit in Support. Both T.O.R.
O - Leave is granted to register the draft NM and draft CH/S.,
returnable till next date.
Adv. Mr. Khandagale for Defendant/MCGM present.
Heard both sides on ad-interim.
Earlier order, if any, to continue till next date.
Authenticated copies be given to the both parties.
Matter adjd to 23/10/2020 for order on ad-interim reliefs.
Next Purpose: AD-INTERIM ORDER
Next Hearing Date: 23-10-2020

Date: 23-10-2020
Business: Adv. Mr. Giriraj h/f. Adv. Mr. P.D. Gandhy for Plaintiff present.
Adv. Mrs. Chavan h/f. Adv. Mr. Khandagale for Defendant/MCGM
present.
ORDER ON AD-INTERIM RELIEF :-
ORDER
1. Perused Plaint alongwith documents filed by plaintiff. Perused Notice of Motion alongwith documents filed by the plaintiff. Perused affidavit cum reply filed by the defendant corporation.
2. Heard learned Adv. Mr.Gandhi at very considerable length for the plaintiff and Adv. Mr. Khandagale at very considerable length for defendant corporation.
3. Plaintiff has challenged notice Under Section 354A of MMC Act, 1988 dated 08/10/2020. After receiving notice, plaintiff has replied it on 13/10/2020. Subsequently, the Mumbai Municipal Corporation was pleased to pass speaking order against the plaintiff on 17/10/2020. Thus, in short plaintiff is seeking ad-interim injunction against the defendant corporation by challenging abovesaid notice issued Under Section 354A of MMC Act, 1988.
4. I have heard Adv. Mr. P. D. Gandhi. He submitted following points:
1) The Corporation cannot issue Notice Under Section 354A of MMC Act, 1988.
2) It is blatant misuse of Section 354A by defendant.
3) Plaintiff admits that he has erected puzzle parking and not erected any construction.
4) The Inspection Report dated 08/10/2020 does not show photographs  date and time.
5) Inspection Report dated 08/10/2020 is without panchanama.
6) The Corporation has not followed due process of law.
7) The Notice should be made Under Section 351 of MMC Act and giving considerable time of seven days.
8) The plaintiff has erected lift jack for car and work is already completed.
9) The plaintiff also filed Architect Report, which shows that the “Temporary Metal Based” vertical section rather be erected on site for the parking and maintenance purpose only.
10) He has prayed for ad-interim protection in favour of plaintiff.
5.   Adv.Mr. Khandagale submitted that as follows:
1) The puzzle parking is construction activity.
2) The corporation is a planning authority who can stop such construction.
3) There is no any document to show that, plaintiff has erected temporary structure.
4) There is complaint by Natraj Caterer company against plaintiff.
5) There is no use to certificate issued by private architect in favour of plaintiff.
6) If anyone wants to construct “Monsoon Shade” permission of BMC is mandatory likewise in case of erection of M.S. angles for parking, prior permission is also mandatory.
7) The Corporation has given ample opportunity to the plaintiff and after considering reply speaking order passed. Hence prayed for rejection.
6. The Complaint dated 01/10/2020 given by Natraj Caters to the BMC, transpires the allegations against the plaintiff for illegal construction at plot reserved for road by MCGM. The record reveals that there are continue complaints by the same person.
7. I have gone through the Inspection Report dated 08/10/2020 which transpires that, at Column No.14, it is mentioned that the construction with M.S. Angles including beam and columns. The nature of construction is independent. The description of structure is erection M.S. Angle frames for puzzle parking of cars. As per plaintiff (No permission is required for mechanical parking at the suit premises) the plaintiff has failed to show such provision within ambit of MMC Act, which supports his claim that such frames for the purpose of puzzle parking no permission is required. Mere submission that permission is not required, cannot suffice the purpose. The Architect is not appointed by the Court as an expert witness for expert opinion as per provisions of Indian Evidence Act, 1972, or in the capacity as a Commissioner under Code of Civil Procedure,1908. The Architect appointed by the plaintiff only. His report is not useful to the plaintiff in such contingency.
8. Hon’ble Chief Justice of Bombay High Court has held in PIL No. 67 of 2017 dated 28/08/2019
“Concerning a property, a suit to enforce or protect an interest in the property which is governed by a Municipal Statute, the interest protected has to be with respect to a plea that prima-facie, the structure which is being targeted is an authorized structure. Meaning thereby, the plaint must make an averment of the sanction obtained from the Corporation and must make an averment that the structure targeted is prima-facie governed by the sanction. Merely pointing out deficiencies in notice or the authority of the person issuing the notice is neither here not there. Thus, the sine qua non of such kinds of suits is a positive assertion made with reference to the sanctioned building plans.”
9. Thus, in short, the sanction from the corporation for construction is very material. The inspection reports transpire that there is no sanction for the erection of the M.S. Angles with frame in the suit premises for the puzzle parking purpose.
10. Thus, considering the Inspection Report, photographs filed on record and law settled by the Hon’ble our High Court. After hearing both the sides at considerable length, I am of the concrete opinion that, plaintiff has not come with clean hands. Accordingly, the plaintiff is not entitled for ad-interim relief. Prima facia it seems that the BMC has followed due process of law.  Hence, I passed following order:
ORDER
1. Ad-interim prayer is rejected being devoid of merits.
Authenticated copies be given to the both parties.
Advocate for Plaintiff tendered an application for Stay of order on
ad-interim relief. T.O.R. and marked as Exh.3. O - Other side to say.
Advocate for Defendant has given say on Exh.3 itself.
Order below Exh.3
1. The BMC shall not take any coercive action against suit structure
for next three weeks from today in order to file appeal before
Hon’ble High Court.
2. The protection period will not be extended further more.
Plaintiff is directed to register draft Ch/s. and draft NM in Ch/s. till
next date.
Matter adjd to 05/01/2021  for Ch/s. reply /NM reply.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 05-01-2021

Date: 05-01-2021
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 05-02-2021

Date: 05-02-2021
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv. Khandagle for deft/MCGM present.
Plaintiff is directed to register the Suit, NM and Ch/s till next date.
Matter adjd to 19/03/2021 for NM and Ch/s Reply.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2021

Date: 19-03-2021
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv. Khandagale for deft/MCGM present.
Plaintiff is directed to register the Suit, NM and Ch/s till next date.
Matter adjd to 30/04/2021 for NM and Ch/s Reply.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2021

Date: 30-04-2021
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 25-06-2021

Date: 25-06-2021
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 30-07-2021

Date: 30-07-2021
Business: Due to Covid-19 pandemic
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 27-08-2021

Date: 27-08-2021
Business: HHJ is on leave.
Next Purpose: NOTICE OF MOTION
Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2021

Date: 20-10-2021
Business: None for plaintiff.
Advocate Tondvalkar for deft./MCGM is present and seeking time to file reply on NM and C/S. Time granted till next date.
Plaintiff is directed to register NM, C/S and suit before next date.
Adjourned for reply to NM and C/S to 26.11.2021.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2021

Date: 26-11-2021
Business: Adv. Hardik Desai for Plaintiff present.
Adv. Mrs. Tondwalkar for Defendant/MCGM is present and seeks time to file reply to NM and Ch/s. Time is granted till next date.
Plaintiff is directed to register the Suit, NM and Ch/s. till next date.
Matter is adjd to 09/02/2022 for NM and CS reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 09-02-2022

Date: 09-02-2022
Business: In view of office order no.7/2022 dated 07.01.2022 and Office order No. 22/2022 dated 28.01.2022 of Hon\''ble Principal Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai, pursuant to circular dated 06.01.2022 and 27.01.2022 of Hon\''ble Bombay High Court prescribing Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) in the wake of sharp surge in COVID-19 cases (all variants) and the views of stakeholders, the matter is adjourned without passing any adverse order against the party/s.
Matter is adjd to 06/04/2022 for NM and CS reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2022

Date: 06-04-2022
Business: HHJ is on leave.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 17-06-2022

Date: 17-06-2022
Business: H.H.J. is on leave today.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 01-08-2022

Date: 01-08-2022
Business: None for Plaintiff.
Adv. Mrs. Tondwalkar for Defendant/MCGM is present and seeks time to file reply to NM and Ch/s. Time is granted till next date. Plaintiff is directed to register the Suit, N/M and Ch/S. till next date.
Matter is adjd to 19/09/2022 for N/M and Ch/S reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 19-09-2022

Date: 19-09-2022
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv. Mrs. Tondwalkar for defendant/ BMC is present and requested time to file reply to N/M and Ch/S. Granted.
Plaintiff is directed to register the suit, N/M and Ch/S till next date.
Adjd. to 11/11/2022 for N/M and Ch/S reply/ compliance by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 11-11-2022

Date: 11-11-2022
Business: None for plaintiff.
Adv. Mrs. Tondwalkar for defendant/ BMC is present and requested time to file reply to N/M. Time is granted till next date.
Plaintiff is directed to register the suit till next date.
Adjd. to 16/12/2022 for N/M reply and compliance by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2022

Date: 16-12-2022
Business: Court is busy in urgent hearing, board is discharged.
Plaintiff is directed to register the suit till next date.
Adjd. to 24/03/2023 for N/M reply and compliance by plaintiff.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 24-03-2023

Date: 24-03-2023
Business: None present for plaintiff.
Adv. Suryavanshi for defendant/BMC present and requested time to file reply to NM. Granted.
Plaintiff is directed to register the suit till next date.
Matter adjd for NM reply to 04.08.2023.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 04-08-2023

Date: 04-08-2023
Business: None present for plaintiff.
Adv. Suryavanshi for defendant/BMC present and requested time to file reply to NM. Granted.
Plaintiff is directed to register the suit till next date. Matter adjd for NM reply to 20.10.2023.
Adjd to 20.10.2023  for NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2023

Date: 20-10-2023
Business: None present for plaintiff
Advocate Suryavanshi  for defendant/BMC present and seeks time to file reply to NM. Granted.
Office is directed to register the suit.
Adjd  to  19.01.2024  for  NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2024

Date: 19-01-2024
Business: None present for plaintiff
Advocate Suryavanshi for defendant/BMC present and seeks time to file reply to NM. Time is granted.
Adjd  to 27.03.2024  for NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 27-03-2024

Date: 27-03-2024
Business: As Court is busy in hearing ad-interim matters and dictating ad-interim order, board is discharged. Hence matter adjourned.
Adjd  to 10.07.2024    for NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2024

Date: 10-07-2024
Business: None for plaintiff
Adv. Mrs. Vyawahare for BMC present.
The plaintiff is directed to get registered NM and C/S till next date
Adjd. to 18/9/2024 for C/S and NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2024

Date: 18-09-2024
Business: None present for plaintiff
Advocate Honmane   for defendant/BMC present and seeks time to file reply to NM. Time is granted.
Adjd  to 06.11.2024  for  NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 06-11-2024

Date: 06-11-2024
Business: CORAM : H.H.J. SHRI S.H. SALUNKHE ( C.R. No. 04 )
As Court is busy in dictating Judgment in su No.1317/2016, hearing of NM in targeted suits and recording evidence in targeted suit, Board is discharged, hence matter adjourned.
Adjd  to  22.01.2025   for NM Reply
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 22-01-2025

Date: 22-01-2025
Business: CORAM : H.H.J. SHRI. A.G. SANTANI (C.R. No. 04)
None present for the plaintiff to tender registered Ch/s. In view of the specific direction. Hence, draft Ch/s is dismissed in default. It be registered for statistical purpose. Adv. Ms. Sangita Honmane for defendant/MCGM is present and sought time to file NM reply. Sufficient time is already granted. Hence, this request is discarded. The NM is proceeded without reply.
Adjourned for NM hearing (No reply)to 19.03.2025.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 19-03-2025

Date: 19-03-2025
Business: CORAM : H.H.J. SHRI. A.G. SANTANI (C.R. No. 04)
None present for the plaintiff to proceed with the NM. Hence, it is posted for dismissal. Adv. Ms. Sangita Honmane for defendant/ MCGM is present.
Adjourned for NM dismissal to 28.04.2025.
Next Purpose: NM FOR DISMISSAL
Next Hearing Date: 28-04-2025

Date: 28-04-2025
Business: CORAM : H.H.J. SHRI. A.G. SANTANI (C.R. No. 04)
None present for the plaintiff to proceed with the NM. Hence, the NM is posted for dismissal. Adv. Ms. Sangita Honmane for defendant/MCGM is present.
Adjourned for NM dismissal to 02.05.2025.
Next Purpose: NM FOR DISMISSAL
Next Hearing Date: 02-05-2025

Date: 02-05-2025
Business: CORAM : H.H.J. SHRI. A.G. SANTANI (C.R. No. 04)
None present for the plaintiff to proceed with the NM. Sufficient time is already granted. Hence, NM No.1484/2020 is dismissed in default. Adv. Ms. Sangita Honmane for defendant/MCGM is present.
Adjourned for written statement to 14.07.2025.
Nature Of Disposal: OTHERWISE
Disposal Date: 02-05-2025

Registration Number: 101484/2020
Transfer Date: 07-03-2022
From Court: 8 - COURT 08 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
To Court: 4 - COURT 04 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE

Filing Number: 105104/2020
Filing Date: 20-10-2020
First Hearing Date: 21st October 2020
Decision Date: 02nd May 2025
Court Number And Judge: 4-COURT 04 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE