Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Abhanga Samata Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, is the owner of land and building at Sunder Nagar, Malad (West), Mumbai. The society had undertaken redevelopment of its building. Respondent No.1, Parag Binani, a member of the society, filed a suit seeking to restrain the society from proceeding with redevelopment, alleging that the redevelopment was not in accordance with law and that his consent was not obtained. The trial court, by order dated 19th March 2021, granted an interim injunction restraining the society from proceeding with redevelopment. The society appealed against this order under Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court heard the appeal and considered the submissions of both sides. The court noted that the redevelopment was approved by the majority of members and that the society had entered into a development agreement with Respondent No.2, Arkade Developers Pvt. Ltd. The court found that the trial court had not properly considered the principles for grant of interim injunction, namely prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. The court held that a single member cannot be permitted to stall the redevelopment process approved by the majority, as it would cause hardship to other members and frustrate the object of the Act. The balance of convenience was in favor of the society, and the member had not demonstrated any irreparable loss. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned order, and dismissed the interim application filed by Respondent No.1.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Appeal against order granting injunction - Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC - The court considered whether the trial court's order granting injunction in favor of a single member against the society's redevelopment was sustainable - Held that the trial court failed to properly assess prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury, and the order was set aside (Paras 1-28). B) Co-operative Society - Majority Decision - Single Member Cannot Stall Redevelopment - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The court held that a single member cannot be permitted to stall the redevelopment process approved by the majority of members, as it would frustrate the object of the Act and cause hardship to other members (Paras 15-20). C) Civil Procedure - Balance of Convenience - Injunction Against Redevelopment - The court found that the balance of convenience was in favor of the society, as the redevelopment was for the benefit of all members and the member seeking injunction had not demonstrated any irreparable loss (Paras 21-25).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in granting an interim injunction restraining the appellant-society from proceeding with redevelopment at the instance of a single member, and whether the impugned order suffers from perversity or lack of jurisdiction.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 19th March 2021 set aside. Notice of Motion No.1589 of 2020 stands dismissed. Interim Application (ST) No.7780 of 2021 disposed of.
Law Points
- Interim injunction
- balance of convenience
- prima facie case
- irreparable injury
- co-operative society
- redevelopment
- majority decision
- single member
- Section 104 CPC
- Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC
- Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act
- 1960
