Case Note & Summary
The case involves two appeals filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (defendant no.1) and M/s. Chhaya Construction Company (defendant no.4) against an interim order dated 29th July 2021 passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay, in Notice of Motion No. 944 of 2021 in L.C. Suit No. 770 of 2021. The suit was instituted by respondents no.1 and 2 (plaintiffs) challenging a notice dated 26th October 2020 issued under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act), calling upon them to show cause why the alleged unauthorised construction should not be removed. The plaintiffs responded on 2nd November 2020, placing documents to show the structure existed prior to 1st April 1962, the datum line for tolerable commercial structures. The Corporation's Designated Officer, by a speaking order dated 12th March 2021, rejected the documents and held that the structure was unauthorised. The plaintiffs then filed the suit and sought interim injunction restraining demolition. The trial court granted the injunction, restraining the Corporation from demolishing the suit structure till disposal of the suit. The Corporation and the developer appealed. The High Court, after hearing arguments, held that the trial court had exercised its discretion judiciously, finding a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiffs based on documents indicating pre-1962 existence. The balance of convenience was in favour of maintaining status quo, as demolition would cause irreparable loss. The appellate court found no perversity or arbitrariness in the impugned order and dismissed both appeals, upholding the interim injunction.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Prima Facie Case - The court examined whether the plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case for grant of injunction against demolition of the suit structure under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The trial court found that the plaintiffs had produced documents indicating existence of the structure prior to the datum line of 1st April 1962, and thus granted injunction. The High Court upheld the order, holding that the trial court's discretion was not perverse or arbitrary. (Paras 1-19) B) Municipal Law - Unauthorised Construction - Datum Line - The dispute pertained to the Corporation's notice under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888, alleging unauthorised construction. The plaintiffs claimed the structure existed prior to 1st April 1962, the datum line for tolerable commercial structures. The Corporation's speaking order rejected the documents, but the trial court found prima facie evidence. The High Court held that the balance of convenience favoured maintaining status quo pending trial. (Paras 2-19) C) Civil Procedure - Appellate Review of Interim Orders - The High Court reiterated that appellate interference with discretionary interim orders is limited unless the order is perverse, arbitrary, or based on no evidence. The court found no such infirmity in the trial court's order and dismissed the appeals. (Paras 18-19)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in granting interim injunction restraining the Municipal Corporation from demolishing the suit structure pending disposal of the suit.
Final Decision
Both appeals are dismissed. The impugned order dated 29th July 2021 passed by the City Civil Court, Bombay, in Notice of Motion No. 944 of 2021 in L.C. Suit No. 770 of 2021 is upheld. The interim injunction restraining the Corporation from demolishing the suit structure till disposal of the suit is confirmed.
Law Points
- Interim Injunction
- Prima Facie Case
- Balance of Convenience
- Irreparable Loss
- Section 351 of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act
- 1888
- Datum Line 1st April 1962
