Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Adarsh Dahisar Gaurav Co-op Housing Society Ltd., filed an appeal against an order dated 14th September 2020 passed by the City Civil Court in Notice of Motion No.1946 of 2018 in L.C. Suit No.2361 of 2015. The suit building, constructed in 1973-1974, comprised 44 flats and 8 shops. The society decided to undertake redevelopment due to the need for major repairs. The respondents, officers of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), threatened to disconnect electricity supply to the building. The society filed a suit seeking injunction against such disconnection. The trial court granted an injunction restraining the respondents from disconnecting electricity supply till one day prior to eviction of the occupants but rejected the prayer for a direction to maintain supply. The High Court considered the appeal and held that the trial court's order was contradictory as it restrained disconnection but did not direct maintenance of supply. The court noted that under Section 169 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, disconnection of electricity cannot precede eviction. The court found that the appellant had made out a prima facie case and the balance of convenience was in its favour. The appeal was allowed, and the respondents were directed not to disconnect electricity supply until one day prior to eviction of the occupants.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Electricity Disconnection - Eviction - Section 169 of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and Section 354 of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 - The appellant society sought injunction against disconnection of electricity supply pending redevelopment. The trial court granted limited injunction restraining disconnection till one day prior to eviction but rejected the prayer for direction to maintain supply. The High Court held that disconnection of electricity cannot be done prior to eviction and must comply with statutory provisions. The court allowed the appeal and directed the respondents not to disconnect electricity supply until one day prior to eviction of the occupants. (Paras 1-17)
B) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Prima Facie Case - Balance of Convenience - The court found that the appellant had made out a prima facie case for injunction as the society was undertaking redevelopment with majority consent and the disconnection would cause irreparable hardship. The balance of convenience was in favour of the appellant. (Paras 10-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the appellant's prayer for a direction to the respondents to not disconnect electricity supply of the suit building until one day prior to eviction of the occupants?
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 14th September 2020 is modified. The respondents are directed not to disconnect electricity supply of the suit building until one day prior to eviction of the occupants. The interim application is disposed of.
Law Points
- Electricity disconnection cannot precede eviction
- Compliance with statutory provisions mandatory
- Section 169 MRTP Act
- Section 354 MMC Act
- Prima facie case for injunction
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (05) 14
Appeal from Order [Stamp] No.96081 of 2020 with Interim Application [Stamp] No.96082 of 2020
Mr. Ashok M. Saraogi a/w Mr. Sushil Upadhyay for Appellant/Applicant; Mr. Narendra V. Walawalkar, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Madhuri More for Respondents-M.C.G.M.
Adarsh Dahisar Gaurav Co-op Housing Society Ltd.
The Designated Officer, Assistant Engineer, M.C.G.M (Bldg & Fact) (R/North Ward) & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against an interim order in a suit for injunction restraining disconnection of electricity supply.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought a direction to the respondents not to disconnect electricity supply of the suit building until one day prior to eviction of the occupants.
Filing Reason
The respondents threatened to disconnect electricity supply to the suit building which was undergoing redevelopment.
Previous Decisions
The trial court granted an injunction restraining disconnection till one day prior to eviction but rejected the prayer for a direction to maintain supply.
Issues
Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the appellant's prayer for a direction to the respondents to not disconnect electricity supply of the suit building until one day prior to eviction of the occupants?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the trial court's order was contradictory as it restrained disconnection but did not direct maintenance of supply, and that disconnection would cause irreparable hardship.
The respondents argued that they had the power to disconnect electricity under the relevant statutes and that the society was not entitled to injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
Disconnection of electricity supply cannot precede eviction and must comply with statutory provisions under Section 169 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The trial court's order was contradictory and the appellant had made out a prima facie case for injunction.
Judgment Excerpts
By this appeal, the appellants have impugned an order dated 14th September, 2020 passed in Notice of Motion No.1946 of 2018 in L.C. Suit No.2361 of 2015 by which, the City Civil Court has restrained the defendants/respondents from disconnecting the electricity supply of building known as 'Gaurav' at Harishankar Joshi Road, Dahisar (East), Mumbai till one day prior to the eviction of the occupants therein.
The trial Court had rejected relief sought in terms of prayer clause (b).
The appellant is a Co-operative Housing Society Limited having its office at Dahisar.
The suit building was constructed in the year 1973-1974.
It comprises total 44 flats and 8 shops.
The occupants of the suit building having found that it requires huge expenditure for repair work, majority of the members of the society thought it fit to go for re-development and, therefore, appointed an architect.
Procedural History
The appellant filed L.C. Suit No.2361 of 2015 in the City Civil Court seeking injunction against disconnection of electricity. Notice of Motion No.1946 of 2018 was filed. The trial court passed an order on 14th September 2020 granting limited injunction. The appellant filed Appeal from Order [Stamp] No.96081 of 2020 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The High Court reserved judgment on 31st March 2021 and pronounced on 6th May 2021.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966: Section 169
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: Section 354
