Case Note & Summary
The appellant, M/s. Leela Enterprises, a partnership firm, filed an appeal against an order of the trial court refusing to grant a temporary injunction restraining the Bombay Municipal Corporation from demolishing the building constructed by the appellant. The appellant had applied for permission to construct a building, and plans were approved only for a ground floor for residential use. An intimation of disapproval was issued on 9th December 1999, and a commencement certificate was issued on 3rd February 2000. However, the appellant constructed a building consisting of ground plus seven upper floors, far exceeding the sanctioned plan. Without obtaining any occupation or completion certificate, the appellant inducted flat purchasers into the flats. The trial court refused to grant an injunction, and the appellant appealed. The High Court, after hearing the parties, dismissed the appeal, holding that a builder who has high-handedly and illegally constructed beyond the sanctioned plan and inducted purchasers without certificates is not entitled to the discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction. The court emphasized that such a builder does not come with clean hands and cannot seek equitable relief.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Temporary Injunction - Equitable Relief - Builder constructed ground plus seven upper floors when permission was only for ground floor, and inducted flat purchasers without occupation certificate - Held that such a builder is not entitled to discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction as he does not come with clean hands (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a builder who has constructed a building exceeding the sanctioned plan and inducted flat purchasers without obtaining occupation or completion certificate is entitled to the discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The appellant is not entitled to the discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction.
Law Points
- Equitable relief
- Temporary injunction
- Unauthorized construction
- Clean hands doctrine
- Discretionary relief
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 23
Appeal from Order No.358 of 2005
Mr. Narula i/b M/s. Jhangiani Narula & Associates for the Appellant, Ms. Geeta Jogalekar for the Respondent No.1
The Bombay Municipal Corporation, The Executive Engineer (Building Proposal) Department, "R" Ward, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, The Assistant Engineer (Building Proposal) Department, "R" Ward, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal from order refusing temporary injunction in a suit against municipal corporation for demolition of unauthorized construction.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from demolishing the building.
Filing Reason
The appellant constructed a building exceeding the sanctioned plan and without occupation certificate, and the municipal corporation threatened demolition.
Previous Decisions
The trial court refused to grant temporary injunction.
Issues
Whether a builder who has constructed beyond sanctioned plan and inducted flat purchasers without occupation certificate is entitled to temporary injunction.
Ratio Decidendi
A builder who has high-handedly and illegally constructed beyond the sanctioned plan and inducted flat purchasers without obtaining occupation or completion certificate does not come with clean hands and is not entitled to the discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction.
Judgment Excerpts
The Appellant in this Appeal high handedly and illegally constructed a building consisting ground plus seven upper floors when permission granted was for construction of only a ground floor.
Without there being any occupation or completion certificate, he has inducted the flat purchasers in the flats in the building.
The question before me is whether such a builder is entitled to grant of discretionary and equitable relief of temporary injunction.
Procedural History
The appellant filed a suit for injunction in the trial court, which refused to grant temporary injunction. The appellant then filed this appeal from order.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Partnership Act, 1932:
