Case Note & Summary
The present suit was filed by M/s. Radha Vishweshwar Co-operative Housing Society Limited 'A' Wing and another (plaintiffs) against M/s. New Bansi Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and others (defendants) seeking a declaration of ownership and permanent injunction in respect of an open piece of land admeasuring about 2000 sq. yards situated at Village Marol, Andheri East, Mumbai. The plaintiffs claimed that the suit property was part of their society's layout and that the defendants had illegally encroached upon it. The plaintiffs also sought an interim injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their possession and from developing the suit property. The defendants opposed the application, contending that the suit property was part of their own layout and that they had valid title and development permissions. The court examined the title documents of both parties, including 7/12 extracts, property cards, and development agreements. The court found that the plaintiffs' title documents did not include the suit property, whereas the defendants had obtained necessary permissions from the municipal corporation and had been in possession. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for grant of interim injunction. The balance of convenience was in favor of the defendants, and no irreparable loss would be caused to the plaintiffs if the injunction was refused. Accordingly, the court dismissed the interim application.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Injunction - Prima Facie Case - Balance of Convenience - Irreparable Loss - The court examined whether the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case for grant of ad-interim injunction in a suit for declaration and permanent injunction concerning ownership of open land. The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case as the suit property was not part of the plaintiff's layout and the plaintiff's title documents did not include the suit property. The balance of convenience was in favor of the defendants, and no irreparable loss would be caused to the plaintiff if injunction was refused. (Paras 1-36) B) Cooperative Housing Society - Ownership of Land - Layout Plan - Title Documents - The plaintiff society claimed ownership of open land based on a layout plan and alleged that the defendant society had encroached. The court examined the plaintiff's title documents, including 7/12 extracts and property cards, and found that the suit property was not included in the plaintiff's title. The court also noted that the defendant society had obtained development permissions and had been in possession. (Paras 10-25) C) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 38 - Permanent Injunction - Interim Relief - The court considered the principles for grant of interim injunction under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and held that the plaintiff had not made out a case for grant of ad-interim injunction as the balance of convenience was against the plaintiff and no irreparable loss would be caused. (Paras 26-36)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and from developing the suit property pending disposal of the suit.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the Interim Application No. 5322 of 2025, holding that the plaintiffs failed to make out a prima facie case for grant of ad-interim injunction. The balance of convenience was in favor of the defendants, and no irreparable loss would be caused to the plaintiffs if the injunction was refused.
Law Points
- Prima facie case
- balance of convenience
- irreparable loss
- interim injunction
- ownership of land
- cooperative housing society
- layout plan
- title documents
- 7/12 extract
- property card
- development agreement
- power of attorney
- suit for declaration
- specific performance
- permanent injunction
