Interim Order 2

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
LONG CAUSE SUIT NO.1307 OF 2019
(CNR NO. MHCC010052392019)
Ramesh Kumar Udaylal Jain ...Plaintiff
Versus
Municipal Corporation For Greater Mumbai ...Defendant
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI A.N. MARE
(C.R. No.11)
DATE : 17th July, 2019.
Mr. V.T.Dubey, Advocate for Plaintiff.
Ms. Mhatre, Advocate for MCGM/Defendant.
ORDER ON DRAFT NOTICE OF MOTION
1. The plaintiff has sought adinterim relief to restrain
defendant Corporation from implementing notice issued under Section
351 of the MMC Act and the speaking order passed in its pursuance.
2. The impugned notice alleges that plaintiff has raised
unauthorized construction of first floor above existing ground floor with
B.M. Wall, ladi coba slab supported on M.S. angle. The sketch in the
notice describes the construction of first floor as mentioned in the
schedule.
3. The identity of the notice structure is not disputed by the
plaintiff.
4. The plaintiff has produced on record copy of sale deed
dated 09/03/2019. Perusal of sale deed reveals that it has no mention
-- 1 of 4 --
Suit No. 1307/19. 2
of mezzanine floor or first floor in it.
5. The plaintiff has claimed that Asha Yashwant Mahashikhare
was the earlier owner of suit premises and was issued a photo pass. The
copy of photo pass is produced at Page No.30 of the plaint which
mentions the height of the hut upto 9 feet. This also rules out the
existence of first floor as alleged by the plaintiff. Rest of the documents
produced by the plaintiff also nowhere, even prima facie, establish the
existence of mezzanine floor or first floor as claimed.
6. The plaintiff was directed to produce photographs of the suit
premises which are produced today with a separate list at Ex.2. It was
submitted before the Court that the height of mezzanine floor of the suit
premises is similar to that of adjoining premises. However the
submission is falsified by the photographs produced by the plaintiff
himself. The photographs clearly reveal that what exists is the first floor
and not the alleged mezzanine floor.
7. The plaintiff has also produced on record description of suit
premises independently. He claims that the height of the mezzanine
floor is 6 feet. This again is not acceptable in the light of photographs.
8. In view of this, the existence of first floor or the alleged
mezzanine floor since prior to the datum line for residential premises is
not established. It is not the plaintiff's case that the first floor is
constructed after obtaining the due permission. In view of these
circumstances, I pass following order :
ORDER
1. Adinterim relief as sought in terms of prayer clause (a) of
-- 2 of 4 --
Suit No. 1307/19. 3
the notice of motion is rejected.
(A.N. MARE)
Judge,
17/07/2019 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated On : 17/07/2019
Transcribed on : 17/07/2019
HHJ Signed on : 17/07/2019
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF
THE ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer
17/07/2019 6.10 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni
Name of the Judge (With
Court Room No.)
HHJ SHRI A.N. MARE
(CR 11)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
17/07/2019
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed
by P.O. on
17/07/2019
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
uploaded on
17/07/2019
-- 3 of 4 --
Suit No. 1307/19. 4
-- 4 of 4 --