Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: ..1..
IN THE BOMBAY CITY CIVIL COURT FOR GREATER MUMBAI
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4895 OF 2019
(CNR NO.MHCC010133872019)
IN
S. C. SUIT NO.1720 OF 2014
Navin Deju Poojari )..Plaintiff
V/s.
F. M. Chinoy and Co. Pvt. Ltd. ).. Defendant
Appearances :
Adv. Suresh K. Mali for plaintiff.
Adv. Little & Co. for defendant.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR JUDGE
SHAIKH AKBAR SHAIKH JAFAR
COURT ROOM NO.03
DATE : 04/08/2022.
ORDER
1. This Notice of Motion is taken out by the defendant contending that
the suit filed by plaintiff is not having cause of action and liable to be rejected
under the provision of Order 7 Rule 11 SubClause (a) of CPC, 1908.
2. It is his contention that plaintiff has filed suit in respect of
subject matter bearing C.S. No.380 of Malbar Hill, Mumbai and in the same
plaint, he has admitted that defendant is having title to the adjoining
property bearing CST No.393. This defendant has no concern with the
property i.e. subject matter of the suit. No cause of action accrued to the
plaintiff to file instant suit and prayed for rejection of the plaint.
3. The plaintiff has resisted the contention by filing reply and
contended that cause of action is well accrued to the plaintiff to file the
suit and prayed for dismissal of the notice of motion.
-- 1 of 3 --
..2..
4. Heard rival parties. Perused the plaint. It reveals from the
averments of plaint at Para (14) that the plaintiff has alleged that
defendant is intending to redevelop his plot bearing No.393 together with
the plot bearing CS 380 and by using money power, the defendant has
vacated eight of the occupants of plot bearing CS 380. Thus, the plaintiff
is claiming the cause of action as well as threatening and apprehension of
dispossession from the suit plot. Thus, the cause of action is very well
explained in the plaint. So far as title of the suit property is concerned, it
is definitely belongs to BMC. The occupants of the CS 380 are not having
title but they are in possession. This fact may affect the case of plaintiff
at the time of final adjudication, but, it does not mean that plaintiff has
no cause of action. The fact that the plaintiff is claiming apprehension of
dispossession is the action to file the suit. In the result, I am of the view
that the notice of motion deserves to be dismissed. In the result, I
proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
1. Notice of Motion No.4895/2019 in Suit
No.1720/2014, is hereby dismissed.
2. Notice of Motion stands disposed off accordingly.
(Order dictated & pronounced in open Court)
(Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar)
Judge,
City Civil Court, C.R. No.03
Dated : 04/08/2022 Greater Bombay
Dictated on : 04/08/2022
Typed on : 08/08/2022
Signed on :
-- 2 of 3 --
..3..
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
08/08/2022 (Mrs. Vidya Abhijit Mande)
at about 06.00 p.m. Stenographer (GradeI.)
Court Room No.03, Gr. Mumbai
Name of the Hon'ble Judge : Shaikh Akbar Shaikh Jafar,
Judge, City Civil Court &
Addl. Sessions Judge
Court Room No.03, Gr. Mumbai
Date of pronouncement of Order : 04/08/2022
Order signed by Hon'ble Judge on : 08/08/2022
Order uploaded on : 08/08/2022
at about 06.00 p.m.
-- 3 of 3 --