Final Order 1

Order Details: Chamber summons
Pdf Text: 1 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
IN THE CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI.
CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 2056 OF 2019
(CNR no. MHCC010116722019)
IN
LONG CAUSE SUIT NO. 2623 OF 2016
(CNR no. MHCC010119552016)
1. B. H. Chemburkar Mandai Licensee's Association ]
Bhaorao Harishchandra Chemburkar Mandai, ]
A society registered under ]
Maharashtra Society Act,1960 ]
2. Mr. Surinderjeet Singh Chandel ]
Age : 42 years, Occ. Business ]
Chairman of Plaintiff No.1 ]
3. Mr. Pravin Bhalla ]
Age : 58 years, Occ. Business ]
Secretary of Plaintiff No.1 ]
4. Mr. Kushal Jain ]
Age : 46 years, Occ. Business ]
Joint Secretary of Plaintiff No.1 ]
5. Naresh Vora ]
Age : 50 years, Occ. Business ]
Treasurer of Plaintiff No.1 ]
6. Mr. Mahavir Jain ]
Age : 44 years, Occ. Business ]
Member of Plaintiff No.1 ]
7. Mr. Dhiren Vora ]
Age : 42 years, Occ. Business ]
Member of Plaintiff No.1 ]
8. Mr. Suresh Darji ]
Age : 58 years, Occ. Business ]
Member of Plaintiff No.1 ]
-- 1 of 7 --
2 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
9. Mr. Radhuba Jadeja ]
Age : 58 years, Occ. Business ]
Member of Plaintiff No.1 ]
Appellants No.2 to 9 are Office Bearers of the ]
Appellant No.1 having their Address at G/36, ]
Chembur Naka, Municipal Market, ]
Chembur Naka, Chembur, Mumbai 400 071. ]....Plaintiff
V/s
The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai ]
Through its Municipal Commissioner, ]
Mahapalika Bhavan, Mahapalika Marg, ]
Mumbai 400 001. ]....Defendant
AND
Baman Dev Koli Mase Vikreta Seva Sangh ]
Bhaorao Harishchandra Chemburkar Mandai, ]
Chembur Naka, Mumbai 400 071. ]....Applicant
Appearances:
Ld. Advocate Mr. M. V. Holamagi for the Plaintiffs.
Ld. Advocate Mr. Parshurame with Ld. Advocate Mr. S. C. Khandagale
for defendant/MCGM.
Ld. Advocate V.G. Sreeram for applicant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI C.V. MARATHE
(Court Room no. 8)
DATED : 20th November, 2019
O R A L O R D E R
1. By instant Chamber Summons the applicant, a registered Society
namely 'Baman Dev Koli Mase Vikreta Seva Sangh', has prayed to add
the said Society as plaintiffs in the suit on the grounds that members of
the said Society vending fish at the suit premises for many decades and
they received similar notices from defendant/MCGM claiming that the
-- 2 of 7 --
3 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
suit premises was dilapidated and needed to be vacated. According to
Ld. Advocate for the applicant, the applicant Society is necessary party
because its members will be directly and materially affected by outcome
of this suit. Ld. Advocate for the defendant/MCGM has pointed out that
the same applicant had filed Interim Application No.1 of 2019 in Writ
Petition No.6405 of 2019 to add it as a party and same was dismissed
by Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide its order dated 27.09.2019 and he
has also invited my attention to the fact that the plaintiff Association
represented to the Court throughout this proceeding that it is
representing all occupants and allottees of the suit premises.
2. I have carefully gone through record of this case. It needs to be
highlighted that the suit came to be dismissed in default on 12.03.2019,
the plaintiffs filed Notice of Motion for restoration of the suit, said
Notice of Motion was dismissed on 24.06.2019, plaintiffs filed A.O. No.
26336 of 2019 and the applicant herein filed Interim Application to add
it as intervener therein. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide order
dated 17.10.2019 restored the suit by setting aside order dated
12.03.2019 and permitted the applicant to file application for adding it
as a party in this proceeding with following observations in paragraph
no.4 which read as under:
-- 3 of 7 --
4 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
"4. Needless to add, since the impugned order of dismissal
of the suit as well as the notices of motion has been set aside
by this order, status quo ante shall revert and accordingly,
interim protection granted by the court, which was operative
as of the date of dismissal of the suit, shall continue to operate
until further orders of the City Civil Court. In case the
intervener herein, Baman Dev Koli Mase Vikreta Seva Sangh,
proposes to the file any intervention application in the pending
proceedings before the City Civil Court, they may do so within
one week from today. Responses of other parties to such
intervention, if any, must be filed within two weeks thereafter.
The contentions of the parties about the locus of Baman Dev
Koli Mase Vikreta Seva Sangh including the contention of the
Defendant corporation that by reason of the order passed by
this court on 27 September 2019 in Interim Application
No.1/2019 in Writ Petition No.6405/2019, the Applicant
intervener has no locus to challenge the corporation's proposal
of demolition of the original market and reconstruction
thereof, are kept open."
From perusal of this order, it is clear that the issue whether the
applicant Society is necessary or proper party to the suit is kept open for
decision of this Court. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that the
present applicant had also filed Interim Application No.1 of 2019 in
Writ Petition No.6405 of 2019 filed by defendant/MCGM against order
of status quo of this Court dated 22.05.2019. The order passed by
-- 4 of 7 --
5 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the said Interim Application dated
27.09.2019 is material to decide the instant Chamber Summons.
Paragraph no. 5 of the said order reads as under:
"In this view of the matter, most of the licensed fish vendors
whom the applicants Sangh claim to represent have filed
undertakings that they will vacate the suit premises. The
undertakings are taken on record and accepted. It is made
clear that in case the members of the applicants Sangh have
any further grievance, it is always open for them to approach
MCGM or file appropriate independent proceedings for
redressal of their grievance."
From this order it can be gathered that the applicant Society is
granted liberty to approach MCGM or file appropriate independent
proceeding for redressal of their grievance and Interim Application
came to be dismissed being not tenable. The Hon'ble Bombay High
Court has also considered the facts that there is some dispute whether
building is to be repaired/reconstructed and all the licensees of the
building would be rehabilitated in the new building in equivalent area
and thereafter order was passed rejecting the Interim Application. In
view of the said order of The Hon'ble Bombay High Court, the applicant
has remedy to approach defendant/MCGM or to take out independent
proceeding for their grievance and therefore the instant Chamber
-- 5 of 7 --
6 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
Summons is liable to be rejected. Hence, following order:
ORDER
Chamber Summons No.2056 of 2019 is rejected.
(C. V. Marathe)
Judge,
Date : 20.11.2019 City Civil Court, Gr. Mumbai.
Dictated on : 20.11.2019
Transcribed on : 20.11.2019
Signed by HHJ on : 20.11.2019
-- 6 of 7 --
7 CS no. 2056-19 in L.C.SUIT no.2623-16
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 20.11.2019 at 5.07 p.m.
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Mrs. Gayatri P. Acharekar
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. C. V. Marathe
C.R. no.08
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
20/11/2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
20/11/2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
20/11/2019
-- 7 of 7 --