IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N.JADHAV, J.
New Deluxe Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. - Applicant
Versus
Pemino Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. - Defendant
Interim Application No. 731 of 2025 In Suit No. 21 of 2025 With Interim Application No. 4573 of 2025 In Suit No. 21 of 2025 With Interim Application No. 6242 of 2025 In Suit No. 21 of 2025
Decided On : 11-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural orders allow plaint amendment and condone delay. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. plaintiff seeks redevelopment injunction against height restriction claim. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. defendant's delayed objection shows mala fides and afterthought. (Para 11) |
| 4. 1943-1944 indentures impose enforceable 30-feet height covenant. (Para 12) |
| 5. defendant lacks locus; covenant vague, obsolete, personal. (Para 14) |
| 6. plaintiff suppressed facts, estopped by approbation, time-barred. (Para 15) |
| 7. covenant runs with land, binds successors without specific assignment. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. no prima facie case for interim relief due to suppression. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 9. interim injunction application dismissed; contentions kept open. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
JUDGMENT:
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
1. Heard Mr. Tulzapurkar, learned Senior Advocate for Applicant / Plaintiff and Mr. Seervai, learned Senior Advocate for Defendant.
2. Plaintiff – Society filed the present Suit seeking permanent injunction against Defendant – Society and declaration of the restrictive covenant in Indentures dated 15.10.1943 and 25.07.1944 as void, invalid and unenforceable.
3. Interim Application No.731 of 2025 is filed for interim reliefs whereas Interim Application No.4573 of 2025 is filed for grant of leave under Order II, Rule 2 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908 and to amend the Suit Plaint by Plaintiff – Society.
4. Interim Application No.6242 of 2025 is filed by Defendant – Society for condonation of delay in filing Written Statement under Order VIII Rule 1 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE , 1908.
5. By consent of the parties, all three (3) Interim Applications are taken up for hearing. Parties are referred to as ‘Plaintiff’ and ‘Defendant’ for convenience.
6. For the reasons stated, Interim Application No.4573 of 2025 is allowed in terms of prayer clause “a”. Amendment is permitted to be carved out within one week from today. Reverification stands dispensed with. Additional Written Statement only to the extent of the amendment as permitted is allowed to be filed on service of the amended Plaint in accordance with law.
7. For the reasons stated, Interim Application No.6242 of 2025 is allowed. Delay of 125 days stands condoned. Written Statement is directed to be taken on record by the Department.
8. Interim Application No.731 of 2025 for interim reliefs is taken up for hearing.
9. The relevant facts necessary for adjudication for grant of interim reliefs in the present case are as follows:-
9.1. Plaintiff – Society is a Co-operative Housing Society duly registered under Registration No. BOM/HSG/-220 of 1962 under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. It is Plaintiff’s case that prior to 1950, Govindram Brothers Private Limited was the owner of land admeasuring 3,016 square yards situated at Altamount Road, Mumbai and out of the 3,016 square yards of land, Govindram Brothers Private Limited sold and conveyed a portion thereof admeasuring 1,900 square yards to Seksaria Industries Private Limited.
9.2. That by registered Agreement / Indenture dated 05.04.1963, Seksaria Industries Private Limited sold, conveyed and transferred land admeasuring 1,588.642 square meters i.e. equivalent to 1,900 square yards bearing Cadastral Survey No.5/664 of Malabar and Cumballa Hill Division to Plaintiff – Society (for short “the suit property”) upon which a building comprising ground plus three (3) storey was constructed by Plaintiff – Society and since then it is in lawful possession and occupation thereof.
9.3. It is Plaintiff’s case that its building constructed on the suit property is more than 60 years old and has deteriorated over a period of time. In view thereof, Plaintiff – Society resolved to undertake redevelopment of the suit property. As part of redevelopment process, Plaintiff – Society conducted a title search by its Advocate to ascertain and confirm its title to the suit property
Daya Singh and Another Vs. Gurudev Singh (Dead) by LRS and Others
Roshan Lal Jeevraj Sethia Vs. Manoj Kumar Sohan Lal Pugalia and Others
Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav and Others Vs. Karamveer Kakasaheb Wagh Education Society and Others
Kishore Samrite Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Union of India and Others Vs. N. Murugesan and Others
Karam Kapahi and Others Vs. Lal Chand Public Charitable Trust and Another
Restrictive height covenants running with land enforceable by successors without specific assignment if annexed via chain of title; suppression of facts and approbation disentitle interim equitable r....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the need for restrictive covenants to be for the beneficial enjoyment of the adjoining property, as outlined in Sections 11 and 40 of the Transf....
A covenant in a Deed of Conveyance runs with the land and binds successor parties, holding statutory presumption of validity unless specifically challenged.
The doctrine of indoor management applies when parties rely on a validly conferred authority despite allegations of internal irregularities; issues of management are internal and not for external par....
Court ruled that temporary injunctions can enforce development agreements even against minority occupants obstructing redevelopment, especially when prior claims against obstruction were dismissed on....
The refusal of a No Objection Certificate for redevelopment based on misinterpretation of lease terms was deemed arbitrary, reinforcing the need for state entities to act fairly under Article 14 of t....
The court held that statutory obligations under MOFA compel the execution of conveyance to a housing society and that such obligations must be upheld to prevent unauthorized development.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.