Bombay High Court
Laborotories Grifffor Pvt. Ltd And 2 Ors vs Municipal Corporation Of Gr. Mumbai And ... on 29 July, 2022
Author: Gauri Godse
Bench: G.S. Patel, Gauri Godse
903-IAL-24146-2022 IN OSWP-2755-2021.DOC
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 24146 OF 2022
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 2755 OF 2021
Laboratories Griffon Pvt Ltd & Ors ...Applicants/
Petitioners
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors ...Respondents
Ms Amruta Devkat, with Vritee Ssoni, for the Applicants/Petitioners.
Mr Sukanta Karmakar, AGP, for State.
Mr Sagar Patil, for the MCGM.
Mr Ashok Saraogi, with Daksha Parmar, i/b Prajot H Jaggi, for
Respondent No.5.
Mr Rakesh Karnik, for M/s Shetgiri & Associates, present.
CORAM G.S. Patel &
Gauri Godse, JJ.
DATED: 29th July 2022 SHEPHALI PC:- SANJAY MORMARE Digitally signed by SHEPHALI SANJAY MORMARE Date: 2022.08.01 10:51:40 +0530 1. This Interim Application is prima facie thoroughly
mischievous. The Applicant has been trying to get a direction from this Court to the MCGM to permit a temporary monsoon shed on the terrace of the structure at Moosa Haji Patrawala Industrial Estate. The terrace is on the 4th floor and above the 4th floor.
Page 1 of 529th July 2022 903-IAL-24146-2022 IN OSWP-2755-2021.DOC
2. On 29th June 2022, a Division Bench passed an order in a Contempt Petition permitting a temporary shed until 30th July 2022. Within that time the water proofing work that the Applicant says was going on in regard to the terrace was to be completed. It was not completed.
3. The Applicants came before us on 25th July 2022 in an Interim Application in the Writ Petition (not the Contempt Petition) and sought an extension of time. We found that what was been sought was actually a permission to erect a shed to protect the Applicants' equipment on the terrace but this was being disguised under the excuse of incomplete water proofing work.
4. The BMC withdrew its earlier permission because the landlord had not consented. Mr Saraogi appears for the landlord. He has no objection to the water proofing work. He has the most strenuous objection to any other kind of shed wanted by the Applicants for their private purposes. There are also serious tenancy disputes and, according to Mr Saraogi, a very large amount is due as unpaid rent. There are proceedings in that regard in the Small Causes Court.
5. The consultant for the waterproofing work is M/s Shetgiri and Associates. Mr Amol Shetgiri himself is unable to attend Court because of a recent mishap. His representative, Mr Rakesh Karnik, is present in Court. He informs us that what remains to be done is the installation of a waterproof membrane and for this the entire terrace will need to be protected and kept dry. He estimates that the Page 2 of 5 29th July 2022 903-IAL-24146-2022 IN OSWP-2755-2021.DOC work will take about 25 to 30 days. M/s Shetgiri and Associates is not the executing contractor. The contractor is Kayath Constructions LLP. They will evidently act according to M/s Shetgiri and Associates' directions.
6. But oddly enough the Interim Application before us is not made in the Writ Petition in which we passed our order of 25th July 2022. Instead it is made in the Contempt Petition on which the previous Division Bench made an order on 30th June 2022. The prayer does not even reference our later order of 25th July 2022. If this is not deliberate and mischievous, then nothing is.
7. That the entire attempt is to reopen an issue that was closed and to once again seek relief that was earlier denied is evident from paragraphs 14 and 15 of the Interim Application where while pretending that what is being done is the waterproofing of the entire terrace, it is laid bare that all that the Appellants wants is a temporary monsoon shed to protect their AC outdoor units and external equipment. On the terrace there are other fittings such as mobile towers with which the Applicants have no concern.
8. We are quite unable to see how without the landlord's consent the Applicants can expect to get BMC permission like this. It is pointless to say these are tenantable repairs. There are disputes about the tenancy. The tenant is not concerned with the entire terrace. The tenant has no rights in respect of the fittings placed by the landlords.
Page 3 of 529th July 2022 903-IAL-24146-2022 IN OSWP-2755-2021.DOC
9. We are making it clear to the Petitioners that we will not accept and the Registry not to accept a single Interim Application in the Contempt Petition by these Petitioners. Any application by way of an Interim Application is to be made in the Writ Petition and it is to be made before this Court and no other Court. The Small Causes Court is not to consider any application by the Petitioner in regard to the terrace, waterproofing or a temporary monsoon shed. No other Court is to entertain any such application in any proceeding initiated by this Petitioner.
10. The only reason we are extending time to 30th October 2022 and subject to strict conditions is because the completion of the waterproofing work is necessary. Left half-done, it will cause damage to all concerned, including the landlords. It does not matter who is bearing the cost of it. The MCGM is therefore directed to permit the monsoon shed covering the terrace to continue until but no later than 30th August 2022. If an extension is required, that application must be made to us before 24th August 2022 in this Writ Petition. It will be considered only if there is a signed report by M/s Shetgiri and Associates explaining why an extension is required.
11. We are making it clear that after the work is completed i.e. by 30th August 2022 or such date as may be extended by this Court on an application as mentioned above, the shed will be removed entirely. The costs of erecting and removing the shed will be borne only by the Applicant and will not recoverable in any proceeding.
Page 4 of 529th July 2022 903-IAL-24146-2022 IN OSWP-2755-2021.DOC
12. We are specifically refusing and rejecting the prayer for a direction to the MCGM to allow a temporary monsoon shed to protect the Applicants' equipment, AC outdoor units, etc that are installed on the terrace. We find it extraordinary that an Applicant should in this day and age of advanced technology tell us that unless there is a monsoon shed, their outdoor AC units will get damaged.
13. The present Application is disposed of in these terms. For this time we refrain from making an order of costs.
(Gauri Godse, J) (G. S. Patel, J)
Page 5 of 5
29th July 2022