Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from a suit filed by the original plaintiff, a firm, against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, its Assistant Commissioner, and the landlady, seeking to restrain them from taking action on a notice dated 8-9-2005 issued under Section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. The trial court had granted a temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiff by order in Notice of Motion No. 4788 of 2005 in L.C. Suit No. 5489 of 2005, thereby restraining the defendants from initiating any action against the suit structure based on the said notice. The defendants (the municipal authorities and the landlady) filed two separate appeals from order, being Appeal from Order No. 349 of 2005 and Appeal from Order No. 350 of 2006, challenging the grant of temporary injunction. When the appeals came up for hearing before the High Court, the temporary injunction had remained in operation for more than five years, and the suit itself was more than six years old. The court observed that, given the long pendency, no purpose would be served by interfering with the impugned order at that belated stage. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed. However, to ensure that the matter is resolved without further delay, the trial court was directed to expedite the hearing and dispose of the suit as early as possible, and in any case, by the end of December 2011. The respondent was not represented before the High Court.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Appeal Against Temporary Injunction - Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Section 351 - The appeal challenged a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from acting on a notice under Section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. The injunction had been in force for more than five years and the suit was pending for over six years. Held, no purpose would be served by interfering at this stage; interest of justice would be better served by expediting the hearing and disposal of the suit. Trial court directed to dispose of the suit by end of December 2011. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court should interfere with the temporary injunction that has been in operation for over five years when the suit itself is six years old.
Final Decision
Both appeals dismissed. Trial Court directed to expedite hearing and dispose of Suit No. 5489 of 2005 by the end of December 2011.
Law Points
- temporary injunction
- no interference at belated stage
- expeditious trial
- interest of justice
