Final Order 1

Order Details: Notice of Motion
Pdf Text: 1 NM 4960-19 in Suit (St) No. 14353-19
CNR NO.MHCC010135462019
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4960 OF 2019
IN
L.C. SUIT (st.) NO. 14353 OF 2019
Shri Ramashankar Ramdev Pandey ......Plaintiff
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai ..... Defendant
Coram : Sanjay N. Yadav, Judge
(Court Room No. 05)
Date : 31st December, 2019.
Appearance:
Ld. Adv. R.P. Singh for plaintiff
Ld. Adv. Suryawanshi for defendant/MCGM.
ORDER
1. The plaintiff by this notice of motion seeks temporary injunction
restraining the defendant corporation from acting upon the order dated
17.12.2019 canceling the Pitch license.
2. Heard Learned Advocate for the plaintiff and Learned Advocate
for the defendant corporation.
3. It not disputed that the defendant was issued notice on
26.06.2019. Plaintiff had replied the notice and order dated 17.12.2019
was passed canceling the license of the plaintiff.
-- 1 of 3 --
2 NM 4960-19 in Suit (St) No. 14353-19
4. It is the own case of the plaintiff that the Pitch license is not
renewed since 2016, as the defendant corporation has refused to
collect the fees to renew the license and had not renewed the same.
The grounds mentioned in the notice dated 26.06.2019 are as
follows:
i] Licensor was not present at the time of inspection.
ii] The plaintiff had not produced the copy of license.
iii] The plaintiff had encroached upon the area more than
permitted.
It is observed in the order that reply to the allegation in the notice
are not satisfactorily explained by the plaintiff in the reply.
5. The plaintiff admits in his pleadings that at the time of inspection
he was not present and his son was present. He also pleaded that the
license was kept at his residence could not produce at the time of
inspection. The plaintiff put forth his explanation in his plaint
regarding excess area then permitted that the adjacent vegetable vendor
would not permit him to extend the area.
6. From the pleading itself it is clear that the plaintiff was not
present at the time of inspection His son was present. He had not
produced the original license when was asked for. It is also admitted
fact that the license was not renewed since 2016. The plaintiff had not
produced any application calling upon the defendant corporation to
accept the renewal fee of the Pitch license.
Admittedly, the license of the plaintiff was not renewed from the
year 2016. The plaintiff was not present at the time of inspection. The
measurement of the stall by the officers of the defendant corporation
cannot be doubted. The breaches alleged that prima facie appears to be
-- 2 of 3 --
3 NM 4960-19 in Suit (St) No. 14353-19
correct. No fault can be found with the notice and order.
The plaintiff has failed to make out the primafacie case in his
favour. The balance of convenience does not lies in favour of the
plaintiff. The plaintiff would not be put to irreparable loss, if the
temporary injunction is refused. In the result, following order is passed.
ORDER
The Notice of Motion No. 4960/2019 is dismissed.
(Sanjay N. Yadav)
Judge,
Date : 31.12.2019 City Civil Court, Mumbai.
Dictated on : 31.12.2019
Transcribed on : 31.12.2019
Signed by HHJ on : 31.12.2019
''CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME : 02.01.2020
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER : Mrs. P.R.Vengurlekar
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room no.)
HHJ Shri. Sanjay N. Yadav
C.R. no. 05
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
31.12.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
31.12.2019
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
on
02.01.2020
-- 3 of 3 --