SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 7136

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. I. CHAGLA
VENUS VASANT VALLEY COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
SHETH SHELTERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND 6 ORS – Respondent
NMS/1339/2018



2024:BHC-OS:5801 Sharayu Khot.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3069 OF 2021 IN SUIT NO. 771 OF 2018 Sheth Developers Private Limited …Applicant/

Defendant No. 8 In the matter between Venus Vasant Valley Co-operative Housing Society Limited …Plaintiff Versus Sheth Shelters Private Limited & Ors. …Defendants WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1361 OF 2018 IN SUIT NO. 771 OF 2018 Venus Vasant Valley Cooperative Housing …Applicant/

Society Ltd. Plaintiff Versus Sheth Shelters Private Limited & Ors. …Defendants WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1339 OF 2018 IN SUIT NO. 771 OF 2018 Venus Vasant Valley Cooperative Housing …Applicant/

Society Ltd. Plaintiff Versus Sheth Shelters Private Limited & Ors. …Defendants ----------

Mr. Sharan Jagtiani, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Priyank Kapadia, Mr. Kaustubh Patil, Mr. Amogh Singh and Roshan Sawant i/by Kaustubh Patil for the Plaintiff.

Mr. Karl Tamboly with Mr. Vatsal Shah and Mr. Yunus Vakharia for the Defendant No.1.

Mr. Pankaj D. Jain a/w Mr. Tanmay Sangani a/w Ms. Tejashree Kamble a/w Mr. Vishal R. Jaiswal for Defendant No.7.

Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Senior Counsel, Mr. Simil Purohit, Ms. Jasmine Kachalia, Deepu Jojo, Mr. Viren Mandhle, Mr. Sahil Singh i/by Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Defendant No.8.

Ms. K.H. Mastakar, for Defendant Nos. 11 to 13 – BMC.

----------

CORAM :R.I. CHAGLA J Reserved on : 19th December 2023 Pronounced on : 5th April 2024 JUDGMENT :

1. Notice of Motion No. 1361 of 2018 and Notice of Motion No. 1339 of 2018 have been taken out by the Plaintiff in the above Suit inter alias seeking confirmation of the ad-interim orders passed therein. The Interim Application No. 3069 of 2021 has been taken out by Defendant No. 8 in the above Suit seeking vacation of ad-interim orders dated 6th February 2018 and 23rd February 2018 passed by this Court in Notice of Motion No. 1361 of 2018 as well as vacation of the order dated 11th July 2018 passed by this Court in Notice of Motion No. 1339 of 2018.

2. By the order dated 6th February 2018, this Court had passed status quo order in respect of the suit building as of the date of the said order and accordingly, the Defendants were to maintain status quo. By the order dated 23rd February 2018, this Court had restrained Defendant No. 1 from selling any further flats and/or creating any third party rights in the subject project, over and above 37 allotment letters issued without seeking prior permissible of this Court. Further, the Defendant No. 1 was directed not to load any TDR for a period of six weeks and no equities shall be claimed by the Defendant No. 1 in respect of any further construction carried out by the Defendant No. 1. By the third ad-interim order dated 11th July 2018, ad-interim relief had been granted in terms of prayer clause (c) of the Notice of Motion No. 1339 of 2018, which reads thus:-

“(c) : that pending the hearing and final disposal of the Suit, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to restrain the Defendant No.1 and/or their servants, agents and assigns or any one claiming through or under them by an order of temporary injunction from obstructing the entry of the Plaintiffs' Society members in the RG1, RG2, RG3 and RG4 areas on the Suit land as shown in the layout plan dated 20th November, 1997 annexed as Exhibit E and Exhibit E- 1 to the Plaint; as disclosed in the layout plan dated 20th November, 1997 annexed as Exhibit E to the Plaint;”

3. The above Interim Application as well as the Notices of Motion were heard together and arguments were made by the Counsel for the parties in the Interim Application, as agreed upon, in view of vacation being sought of the aforementioned ad-interim orders. It is necessary to advert to the relevant facts, which are material for deciding the present Interim Application and the Notices of Motion.

a) The larger property has been defined as CTS Nos.

104A to 104J admeasuring 68,373.20 sq.meters, Village Dindoshi, Taluka Borivali. Whereas the Suit land is defined

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top