The court emphasized that public interest in access to a completed public road outweighs private claims, disallowing obstruction based on width specifications set by plaintiffs.

JUDGMENT :

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Appellant – Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai; Mr. Savant, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 (Plaintiffs) in Appeal From Order; Mr. Sharma, learned Advocate for Applicants – Intervenors in Interim Application (St.) No.36164 of 2025 and Mr. Kanade, learned Advocate for Applicant in Interim Application No.13090 of 2025.

2. Present Appeal From Order is filed by Appellant – Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (for short ‘Corporation’) i.e. Original Defendant to challenge order dated 31.07.2025 passed by City Civil Court, Borivali Division, Dindoshi, Goregaon, Mumbai in Notice of Motion No.315 of 2025 in L.C. Suit No.2032 of 2023 partly allowing the said Notice of Motion and injuncting the Corporation from taking any action against the Suit structures i.e. security cabin, entrance gate and MS tin sheet Gate until completion of development and construction of road measuring 13.40 meters as per Development Plan and as per the directions of this Court by order dated 03.10.2023 in Appeal From Order No.811 of 2023. Corporation’s case is that without considering material facts and documents on record, the impugned order is passed restraining Corporation from complying with directions contained in order dated 03.10.2023 passed by this Court in previous proceedings. Order dated 03.10.2023 is the precursor order which is the subject matter of interpretation and dispute.

3. Interim Application No.13090 of 2025 is filed by Panom Developers LLP seeking intervention in the present Appeal From Order being an interested party seeking to set aside the impugned order dated 31.07.2025. Panom Developers LLP is the Developer of the adjoining plot who has completed a SRA scheme successfully on the said plot. Interim Application (St.) No.36164 of 2025 filed Shiv Siddhi Vinayak Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. 7 Co-operative Housing Societies and one (1) Tenant Association seeking to intervene and challenge the impugned order being aggrieved with the inaction and failure of the Corporation to open up the connector DP road between Sahar Road and Sai Mandir Road at Andheri (East) which is already acquired by the Corporation and now stands developed.

4. Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for the Corporation being aggrieved with the impugned order would submit that Plaintiffs were directed to retain the impugned structures only till the time Corporation completes development and construction of the DP Road on the adjoining plot. He would draw my attention to the order dated 03.10.2023 to contend that this Court has not contemplated that development and construction of the road line has to be completed having width of 13.40 meters in the directions given by Court.

4.1. He would submit that Trial Court has incorrectly and wrongly interpreted directions in the order dated 03.10.2023 while passing the impugned order by observing that unless and until the 13.40 meters wide DP road is constructed, the impugned structures would stand protected. He would submit that order dated 03.10.2023 is completely bereft of the width of the road and all that it directs is construction and development of DP Road and handing over the same by the Developer developing the adjacent SRA plot to the Corporation.

4.2. He would submit that once that is done, there is no reason whatsoever for Plaintiffs to persist with impugned strictures and