COMMERCIAL APPEAL NO. 371 OF 2019

Appeal against an interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in a commercial suit, wherein a Court Receiver was appointed and an interim mandatory injunction was granted directing certain defendants to hand over possession of flats and garages and execute permanent alternative accommodation agreements in relation to redevelopment of a co-operative housing society building.

The appellants sought to set aside the order dated 2 May 2019 appointing a Court Receiver and granting interim mandatory injunction.

The order under appeal was passed allowing Notice of Motion No. 285 of 2016 in Commercial Suit No. 509 of 2016, which directed defendants to hand over possession, execute agreements, and receive charges pending suit for redevelopment.

The learned Single Judge had allowed the notice of motion, appointing a Court Receiver and directing defendants to hand over possession and execute agreements. That order is under appeal before the Division Bench.

Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in appointing a Court Receiver and granting an interim mandatory injunction directing the defendants to hand over possession and execute permanent alternative accommodation agreements at the interlocutory stage?

The correctness of the view taken by the learned Single Judge in allowing Notice of Motion No. 285/2016 in Commercial Suit No. 509/2016 vide impugned order dated 2 nd May 2019 is under scrutiny in the present appeal. Vide order dated 2 nd May 2019 a Court Receiver has been appointed to take possession of the suit property. Defendant Nos. 2 to 16 in the suit have been directed to execute permanent alternative accommodation agreements and receive temporary accommodation charges. Said defendants have been directed vide an interim mandatory injunction to hand over possession of the flats and two garages in their possession. The Society was allotted 38 Acres and 15 Gunthas of land comprising 162 plots, each plot is a single entity plot, which means that Floor Space Index ( “FSI” ) available is plot-wise and not to the entire land which was allotted to the Society. The appeal concerns only one plot of land bearing CTS No. 199. The building is named “Gurukripa”. It was constructed in the year 1970. With passage of time the building deteriorated and reached a stage where it was not advisable to refurbish the building. After demolition the building, reconstructing a new building was the only way forward.

The suit was filed as Commercial Suit No. 509 of 2016. Notice of Motion No. 285 of 2016 was taken out seeking interim reliefs. On 2 May 2019, the learned Single Judge allowed the notice of motion, appointing a Court Receiver and granting interim mandatory injunction against defendant nos. 2 to 16. Aggrieved, the defendants (appellants herein) filed Commercial Appeal No. 371 of 2019. The appeal was heard by the Division Bench and reserved on December 6, 2019, pronounced on December 11, 2019.

• Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925:
• Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960:
• Companies Act, 1956: