Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Abhinandan Commercial Centre Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against an order of the City Civil Court dated 13th January 2005, which partly granted ad-interim injunction in a suit challenging a notice dated 30th September 2004 issued under Section 351 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act) and the subsequent order dated 10th November 2004 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. The notice pertained to a terrace room and three sheds. The trial court protected only the terrace room from demolition. The appellant contended that ad-interim relief should have been extended to the three sheds as well. The High Court, after hearing counsel for both parties, held that the balance of convenience and prima facie case did not favour protecting the three sheds, and thus dismissed the appeal, confirming the trial court's order.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Demolition Notice - Section 351 MMC Act, 1888 - Ad-interim Injunction - Challenge to notice dated 30.09.2004 and order dated 10.11.2004 - Appellant sought injunction against demolition of terrace room and three sheds - Trial court granted partial protection only to terrace room - Held that balance of convenience and prima facie case did not favour protection of three sheds (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to ad-interim injunction protecting the terrace room and three sheds from demolition under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the City Civil Court dated 13th January 2005 is confirmed, protecting only the terrace room from demolition.
Law Points
- Ad-interim injunction
- Section 351 MMC Act
- 1888
- Prima facie case
- Balance of convenience
- Irreparable loss
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (02) 150
Appeal From Order No.109 of 2005
Mr. J.J. Shah for the Appellant, Mr. J. Xavier for the Respondent
Abhinandan Commercial Centre Pvt. Ltd.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against an order of the City Civil Court partly granting ad-interim injunction in a suit challenging a demolition notice under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought ad-interim injunction to protect a terrace room and three sheds from demolition.
Filing Reason
The appellant challenged a notice dated 30th September 2004 and an order dated 10th November 2004 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of the respondent-Corporation under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888.
Previous Decisions
The learned Judge of the City Civil Court partly granted ad-interim injunction, protecting only the terrace room from demolition.
Issues
Whether the appellant is entitled to ad-interim injunction protecting the three sheds from demolition under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that ad-interim relief should have been extended to the three sheds as well.
Ratio Decidendi
The balance of convenience and prima facie case did not favour protecting the three sheds from demolition under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned Judge has protected only the terrace room from demolition.
The learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that ad-interim relief should have been extended even to the three sheds.
Procedural History
The appellant filed a suit in the City Civil Court challenging a notice dated 30.09.2004 and order dated 10.11.2004 under Section 351 of the MMC Act, 1888. The trial court partly granted ad-interim injunction on 13.01.2005, protecting only the terrace room. The appellant appealed to the High Court on 07.02.2005.
Acts & Sections
- Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act): 351
