Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: N/m No. 3548/19 in Suit No. 1979/18. 1 Order.
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY.
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3548 OF 2019
(CNR NO. MHCC01-009652-2019)
IN
L. C. SUIT NO. 1979 OF 2018
(CNR NO. MHCC01-009735-2018)
Bhaskar Chandrakant Padman and Others ...Plaintifs
Versus
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai
and another ...Defendants
CORAM : SHRI G.G.BHANSALI.
(C.R.NO.11).
DATE : 17th FEBRUARY, 2020.
Mr. B.P.Shukla, Advocate for Plaintifs.
Ms. Manda Loke, Advocate for Defendant No.1 / MCGM.
Mr. Pratap Singh, Advocate for Defendant No.2.
ORDER
This is a motion taken out by plaintif for permission
to repair.
2. Perused reply submitted by defendants 1 and 2.
3. Ld. Advocate B.P.Shukla for plaintif submits that
various applications came to be fled by plaintif for permission
to repair. However, there is no specifc order passed on his
application nor there is any correspondence on behalf of
-- 1 of 3 --
N/m No. 3548/19 in Suit No. 1979/18. 2 Order.
MCGM. Plaintif is paying regular rent to the landlord Santosh
Pawar. Plaintif has disputed ownership of defendant no.2.
according to plaintif, building is ‘C-II Type’ and it can be
repaired.
4. Heard ld. Advocate Manda Loke for MCGM,
requested to peruse TAC Report whereby suit structure is ‘C-I
Type’ building, it is 100 years old building. Ld. Advocate
Pratap Singh for defendant no.2 submits that he is owner of
suit property and he supports MCGM.
5. On perusal of record, impugned structure
Sakharwala Building is shown as ‘C-I Type’ building. Plaintif is
failed to produce tenancy agreement with Santosh Pawar nor
receipt in respect of regular payment of rent to the landlord
are produced by him. There is no case of plaintif that he
issued a notice to the landlord to repair the building, nor there
is any litigation instituted by the plaintif for repairing of the
premises, in default when landlord has not repaired.
6. On perusal of prayer clause, the question before
the Court is not to the extent of repairing of the building. The
fact in issue in present case is, notice issued under Section
354 of MMC Act dated 25/06/2018. On perusal of TAC Report,
it appear to be well reasoned. Therefore the building is
captioned as ‘C-I Type’ building. In result, there is no
substance in motion. Hence the order :
- ORDER -
1. Notice of Motion No. 3548/2019 stands dismissed.
-- 2 of 3 --
N/m No. 3548/19 in Suit No. 1979/18. 3 Order.
2. N/m No. 3548/19 is disposed of accordingly.
(G.G.BHANSALI)
Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date : 17/02/2020. Mumbai.
1. Dictated on : 17/02/2020.
2. Transcribed on : 18/02/2020.
3. Signed on : 18/02/2020.
4. Delivered to Certifed :
Copy Section on
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
18/02/2020. 4.19 p.m. Miss M.A.Kulkarni
Name of the Judge (with Court Room no.) HHJ Shri G.G.Bhansali.
(Court Room No.11).
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order
17/02/2020.
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on 18/02/2020.
Judgment/Order uploaded on 18/02/2020.
-- 3 of 3 --