Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: N. M. No.4056/2019 Order
MHCC010111512019 Presented on : 04.11.2019
Registered on : 04.11.2019
Decided on : 23.09.2025
Duration : 05 10 19
Years Months Days
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4056/2019
(CNR NO. MHCC010111512019)
IN
SHORT CAUSE SUIT NO. 1887/2019
Mr. Mubeen Ahmed Mohammad Yusuf
and Another … Plaintiffs
Versus
Mr. Asif Memon and others … Defendants
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE, A. C. DAGA
: COURT ROOM NO. 61
DATE : 23.09.2025
Appearances: -
Adv. Sanjay Panchal for Plaintiffs.
Adv. Shahbaj Khan for Defendants.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
Instant Notice of Motion is moved by the Plaintiff No.1
praying for restraining the Defendant from the disturbing the Plaintiff’s
activities and their ingress and egress as Imams of Al-Madina Masjid
situated at Agripada, bearing Reg. No. E-15392 (Mumbai), Mumbai
Central, Mumbai - 400011. It is pleaded in the Notice of Motion that the
pleadings of plaint are adopted. The Defendants No.1 and 2 are private
persons. The Defendant No.3 is a Trust where the Plaintiffs are in
employment of the said Trust and conducts religious activities as well as
-- 1 of 6 --
N. M. No. 4056/2019 ... 2 … Order
teaching job to the children who attend Madressa. Plaintiff has filed on
record copy of the Salary Register (Exh.A). It is further pleaded that on
18.01.2019 at about 3.00 p.m., Defendants along with others entered
the Masjid premises, gave threat of dire consequences. They abused and
assaulted Plaintiffs for no reason and compelled Plaintiffs to move out
of the Trust premises by orally informing that Plaintiffs are removed and
they should not perform the job of Imam. Plaintiffs were made to sign
some documents giving threats to the life of Plaintiffs and their family
members. Plaintiffs made enquiry with the Trust Authority and were
informed that the Defendants are not concerned with the Trust and
were not assigned work of removal or appointing any person as Imam.
Thereafter, Report was given to the Police marked as (Exh.B) and
(Exh.C). Plaintiffs met with the trustees. They told that they had not
issued any Memo or Notice to Plaintiffs, but Defendants have forcefully
taken signature of Plaintiffs on resignation papers. Hence, the Notice of
Motion.
2. Defendants have not filed their Reply. Accordingly, Notice
of Motion proceeded without their Reply.
3. Heard Ld. Advocate for Plaintiffs. He has submitted that
Defendants No.1 and 2 are not the Trustees or the Office bearers of
Defendant No.3. They do not have any authority to act on behalf of the
Defendant No.3. He has further submitted that on 18th January, 2019,
Defendants No.1 to 3 forcefully entered the Masjid. Defendant No.3
threatened Plaintiffs with dire consequences assaulted them and thrown
them out of the premises. The Trustees had not removed the Plaintiffs
from the service. Terminating service of Plaintiffs by Defendants No.1
and 2 is illegal. Hence, prayed for allowing the Notice of Motion.
-- 2 of 6 --
N. M. No. 4056/2019 ... 3 … Order
4. Considering pleadings, following Points arise for my
determination and I have recorded my findings against each of them for
the reasons given below: -
Sr.
No. Points Findings
1 Whether Plaintiffs have made out prima-
facie case? :: No.
2 Whether balance of convenience lies in
favour of Plaintiffs? :: No.
3 Whether irreparable loss will be caused to
the Plaintiffs in case injunction as prayed is
not granted?
::
No.
4 What Order?
::
Notice of
Motion is
rejected as per
final Order.
REASONS
As to Points No. 1 to 3: -
5. I have carefully gone through the pleadings in the plaint
and the documents filed along with it. It is the claim of the Plaintiffs
that Defendants No.1 and 2, who are not connected with Defendant
No.3 and are not the Office bearers, have forcefully removed the
Plaintiffs by taking their signatures on blank documents and have given
threats.
6. The Pleadings, if seen with the documents on record and in
particular, the document (Exh.B) which is copy of the complaint dated
22.01.2019 made by the Plaintiff No.1 to Senior Inspector of Police,
Agripada Police Station. The title of the complaint is against the
Trustees for giving life threat and taking resignation forcefully by Asif
Memon and three others. If the complaint is read into then it appears
-- 3 of 6 --
N. M. No. 4056/2019 ... 4 … Order
that there are allegations in the complaint against the Trustees along
with Defendant No.1 and others for giving life threat and taking
resignation forcefully. Whereas as per pleadings in the plaint, the
resignation was forcefully taken by Defendants No.1 and 2 and Trustees
were not having any role in it. The com plaint was made prior to filing
of the suit and therefore, relying on the pleadings in the complaint it
appears that the Plaintiff No.1 has alleging against the Trustees as well
as Defendants No.1 and 2 for giving threat and taking resignation
forcefully. It follows that as on today there is a document though as per
Plaintiff it was signed under threat which goes to show that the
Plaintiffs have resigned resulting into giving of complaint dated
22.01.2019.
7. It has to be proved by leading appropriate evidence as to
whether such resignation was obtained under threat or not. Secondly,
the Trustees have not been joined as party to the proceedings. Without
giving an opportunity of leading evidence to the parties, at this
juncture, it cannot be said that the Defendants No.1 and 2 alone have
removed Plaintiffs from the work of Defendant No.3. As such, Plaintiffs
failed to make out prima-facie case. Balance of convenience does not lie
in favour of Plaintiffs. Irreparable loss will be caused to Defendant No.3
in case the injunction as prayed is granted in favour of plaintiffs. As
such, I answer Points No.1 to 3 in the negative.
As to Point No. 4: -
8. Having answered all the Points in sum and substance, I
pass the following Order: -
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion is rejected.
-- 4 of 6 --
N. M. No. 4056/2019 ... 5 … Order
2. Accordingly, Notice of Motion No. 4056 of 2019 stands disposed
off.
DATE: - 23.09.2025 (A. C. DAGA)
JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT,
GR. MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 23.09.2025
Transcribed on : 23.09.2025
Checked on : 23.09.2025
Signed on : 23.09.2025
-- 5 of 6 --
N. M. No. 4056/2019 ... 6 … Order
"CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER"
DATE: 23.09.2025, AT 05.45 P. M. Siddhesh S. Shirke
STENOGRAPHER (GRADE-I)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court no.) : SHRI A. C. DAGA, (C. R. NO.
61)
Date of pronouncement of
Judgment/Order : 23.09.2025
Judgment/Order signed by the P. O.
on : 23.09.2025
Judgment/Order uploaded on : 23.09.2025
-- 6 of 6 --