Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 2194-19 in Suit No. 1304-19
CNR NO.MHCC0100609019
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2194 OF 2019
IN
L.C. SUIT NO. 1304 OF 2019
Mohammed Afzal Zikkar Bagsarya …...Plaintiff
Versus
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Anr. ..... Defendants
Coram : Sanjay N. Yadav, Judge
(Court Room no. 05)
Date : 08th November, 2019.
Appearance:
Ld. Adv. Mr. Pande for the plaintiff.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Pradeep Patil for defendant/MCGM.
ORDER
1. The plaintiff by this notice of motion seeks temporary injunction
restraining the defendant corporation from acting upon the Notice
issued under Section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act,
1888 (hereinafter referred to as 'the MMC Act') dated 16.05.2019 and
the Order dated 17.05.2019.
2. Heard Learned Advocate for the plaintiff and Learned Advocate
for the defendant corporation.
3. The schedule of the notice dated 16.05.2019 reads as under:
''Unauthorisely vertical extension and construction of 10th
-- 1 of 3 --
2 NM 2194-19 in Suit No. 1304-19
floor at bldg no. 316/320, I R Road, 3/7/11, Ghogari 2nd cross lane,
Pydhonie, Mumbai03 by way of using M S angle section, siporex block
masonry walls and roof with ladi coba slab admeasuring size of 20m x
12m x 3.0 m (ht) without permission from competent authority i.e.
MCGM.''
4. The notice was replied by the plaintiff. It is contended that
building is Ground, Mezzanine Floor plus 8th Floor plus Attic Floor. It is
contended that the defendant has wrongly described in the notice as
10th floor. It is contended that the plaintiff had not carried out addition.
It is denied that the plaintiff is carrying out any construction.
Vide order dated 17.05.2019, the plaintiff was directed to
demolish the notice structure. It is contended by the defendant
corporation in the notice that the plaintiff was issued notice under
Section 354A of the MMC Act as the plaintiff failed to show the
authorization of the notice structure. It is contended that the document
submitted do not show any authorization of the notice structure.
5. The plaintiff is the tenant of the notice structure and had tried to
justify the construction in the 10th floor. The notice is issued in respect
of the construction of 10th floor. The plaintiff had failed to show the
authorization of the notice structure by showing the permission in his
favour. There is nothing to show that the construction which is in
progress was with permission from competent authority.
The plaintiff has failed to make out the primafacie case in his
favour. The balance of convenience does not lie in favour of the
plaintiff. The plaintiff would not be put to irreparable loss, if the
temporary injunction is refused.
In the result, following order is passed.
-- 2 of 3 --
3 NM 2194-19 in Suit No. 1304-19
ORDER
The Notice of Motion No. 2194/2019 is dismissed.
(Sanjay N. Yadav)
Judge,
Date : 08.11.2019 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 08.11.2019
Transcribed on : 11.11.2019
Signed by HHJ on : 20.11.2019
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 23.11.2019 at 3.30 p.m.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Mrs. K.S.Bhosale
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. Sanjay N. Yadav
C.R. no. 05
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
08.11.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
20.11.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
23.11.2019
-- 3 of 3 --