Order 2

Order Details: Order below exhibit
Pdf Text: IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY
ORDER BELOW EXH.3
IN
LONG CAUSE SUIT NO. 3270 OF 2019
Smt. Vaishali Ashok Palkar, ... Plaintiff
V/s.
The Municipal Corporation of
Gr. Mumbai ...Defendants
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHRI. R. B. PARVEKAR
CITY CIVIL COURT
GR. BOMBAY ( C.R.NO.06)
DATE : 07/07/2023
Adv. S.G. Shinde for the plaintiff.
Adv. Ms.Deepali Patil for the defendants/BMC.
ORAL ORDER
1. Read application and say. Heard both the sides.
2. By this application, the plaintiff seeks time of eight weeks
to approach before Hon'ble High Court against order passed in Notice
of motion No.2360/2023 by this Court today. Defendant/BMC objected
the present application.
3. On perusal of record and proceedings, it appears that
during the pendency of the suit for declaration and injunction, the
plaintiff seeks interim protection order against implementation of notice
and order issued by the defendants/BMC. The said interim relief sought
by the plaintiff is rejected by this Court today. Therefore, the plaintiff
seeks time to challenge the said order before the Hon'ble High Court.
-- 1 of 4 --
2 Exh.3
4. Learned advocate for the plaintiff submitted before Court
that if time for challenging order is not given to the plaintiff, then it will
defeat right to appeal. If time is not given, defendants/BMC may take
coercive action for demolition of notice structure. If notice structure is
demolished, then very purpose of filing present suit will be defeated.
Defendant/BMC objected the submissions raised on behalf of the
plaintiff.
5. It is settled principle of law that every litigant who is
aggrieved by the order of the Court of the first instance has a legitimate
right to move the higher Court ask for redress, and therefore, a
reasonable opportunity should normally be given in that behalf to all
the litigants, provided of course the prayer on the face of if does not
appear to be frivolous or vexatious. In the light of settled principle
submissions raised on behalf of the plaintiff found to be acceptable one.
6. It is settled principle of law that equal opportunity should
be given to both the parties to challenge the order passed by the Court
before the Hon'ble Appellate Authority. If opportunity by granting time
for preferring appropriate application before the Hon'ble High Court is
granted to the plaintiff, then it will curtail the multiplicity of the
litigation. Submissions raised on behalf of the plaintiff found just and
reasonable one. Hence, in the interest of justice it is just and equitable
in the eye of law to grant sufficient time to the plaintiff for challenging
interim order before the Hon'ble High Court of judicature of Bombay.
Accordingly, I pass the following order :
-- 2 of 4 --
3 Exh.3
ORDER
1. Time for challenging order passed in Notice of motion No.
2360/2023 is granted till 14.07.2023.
2. The defendants/BMC are directed not to take coercive
action and not to act upon impugned notice and speaking
order in respect of the suit premises till 14.07.2023.
3. Both the parties to take note of this order.
(R. B. Parvekar)
Date-07/07/2023 Ad-hoc Judge,City Civil Court,
Gr. Bombay .
Dictated on :07/07/2023
Typed on :07/07/2023
Signed on :
-- 3 of 4 --
4 Exh.3
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
10/07/2023 12.30 p.m ( Mayuresh
P. Tathe)
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court
room No.)
HHJ Shri. R. B. Parvekar (C.R.No.06)
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
07/07/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O.on
10/07/2023
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on 10/07/2023
-- 4 of 4 --