Skip to main content
Court Order

Order 1

CNR MHCC01006198201812 Jun 2018
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Order 1 · 12 Jun 2018 · CNR MHCC010061982018

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: :1: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
CNR NO. MHCC01 0061982018
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1895 OF 2018
IN
S.C. SUIT NO.3054 OF 2014
Smt. Vasudha Daji Shetge ] .. Plaintiff.
Versus
Shri Suhas Laxman Manjrekar ] .. Defendant.
CORAM: HER HONOUR JUDGE
BHARTI KALE
(C.R. No. 4).
DATE: 12th June, 2018.
Adv. Parker for plaintiff.
Adv. S.V. Parkhe for the defendant.
ORDER
The plaintiff has taken out this notice of motion for
permitting the plaintiff to obtain passport on the address of the suit
premises.
2. The plaintiff has submitted that she is in use, occupation
and possession of the suit premises. Her husband and children are
residing in the suit premises. In the plaint, she has stated that she is in
possession of the suit premises and defendant has executed a General
Power of Attorney dated 18/03/2001 in her favour and transferred
-- 1 of 6 --
:2: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
rights in her favour. She is having all the documents, such as Aadhar
Card, Ration Card and Election Card of the suit premises. As the
plaintiff was trying to dispose of the suit premises, therefore she has
filed present suit. She has stated that she has applied for passport
alongwith her husband and children. The defendant has informed the
concerned authorities and raised objection to issuance of passport on
the address of suit premises. She has submitted that he cannot object
for the same. Hence, the present notice of motion is taken out.
3. The defendant has filed reply denying therein the contents
of the notice of motion. He has categorically stated that the plaintiff is
not residing in the suit premises and the Power of Attorney is
fraudulently executed document. He has given address of the plaintiff at
Kandivali and submitted that she is suffering from Orthopedic problem
and therefore she is not residing in the suit premises. It is stated that
she is trying to create evidence by obtaining passport of the suit
premises. He has stated that she has attempted to obtain NOC from the
society and Police Station, but the same was denied. It is also stated
that the suit flat is standing in his name and he has only allowed the
plaintiff to reside.
4. Heard Advocate for the plaintiff and defendant.
5. In view of rival pleadings of the parties following points
arise for my determination and I have recorded my findings thereon for
the reasons to follow:
POINTS FINDINGS
(1) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the
-- 2 of 6 --
:3: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
reliefs claimed ? : No.
(2) What order ? : As per final order.
REASONS
Point Nos.1:
6. The plaintiff has filed this suit for protecting her possession
and that she should not be dispossessed from the suit premises without
following due process of law. The Court has framed the issues and
issues are that 'Whether the suit is maintainable without seeking relief
of declaration and whether plaintiff is entitled for permanent injunction
as prayed ?'. The plaintiff has produced many documents such as
Aadhar Card and Ration Card, which primafacie reflects that she was
residing in the suit premises. She has also produced receipts issued by
the Cooperative Housing Society and electricity bills. This court at the
time of hearing of adinterim relief has considered all the documents
and held that plaintiff may not be residing in the suit premises for
temporary period, but that itself does not go to show that she is not in
possession of the suit premises and accordingly adinterim relief was
granted in favour of the plaintiff. On 03/09/2016 onwards adinterim
relief order has not been continued and the notice of motion is kept for
hearing with the suit. The plaintiff has not got decided the notice of
motion for interim relief. So, at present there is no interim order in
favour of the plaintiff. Now, she is seeking relief from the court to
obtain the passport at the address of the suit premises. For getting the
passport the applicants are required to give the address proof where
they are residing at the time of obtaining passport and that proof may
be in different form. The defendant has given the present address of
the plaintiff. At the time of arguments also the plaintiff has stated that
she has temporarily shifted to other premises. The plaintiff has also
-- 3 of 6 --
:4: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
produced documents from the society to show that plaintiff is not
residing in the suit premises. The plaintiff has produced the receipts,
which are issued by the society before filing of the suit to show that she
is paying society charges. The plaintiff has also produced a letter from
the society dated 23/10/2013 mentioning therein that the plaintiff is
bonafide member of the society and residing with the family members
in the suit premises since 1981 and having no objection to transfer the
said flat in her name. The said letter is dated 23/10/2013. Now, the
said letter reflects that the plaintiff was residing in the suit premises.
However, at this stage the plaintiff is seeking orders about her present
address and it is for the plaintiff to give her address proof before the
passport authorities. This court cannot grant relief as claimed by the
plaintiff that she be permitted to obtain passport at the address of the
suit premises, as this court has not decided the dispute between the
parties. At this stage, I am not inclined to grant relief claimed by the
plaintiff. Therefore I answer Point No.1 in negative and proceed to pass
the following order.
ORDER
The Notice of Motion No.1895 of 2018 is dismissed.
(BHARTI KALE )
Judge
City Civil Court, Gr. Bombay.
Date : 12/06/2018
Dictated on: 12/06/2018
Transcribed on: 13/06/2018
Signed on: 13/06/2018
-- 4 of 6 --
:5: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
14/06/2018 at 11.00 a.m
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME (DASTAGIR B. MULLA)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.
H.H.J. BHARTI KALE (Court
Room No.4)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
12/06/2018
Judgment/Order signed by P.O.on 13/06/2018
Judgment/Order uploaded on 14/06/2018
-- 5 of 6 --
:6: NM-1895-18 Suit.3054-14
-- 6 of 6 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.