KALPANA KAMLESH PATADIA Vs. SITARAM KUNTHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these contempt petitions raise common question of fact and law and arise out of one and same order passed in two different suits, they are being heard and decided together by this common Judgment.

(2.) The petitioner in Contempt Petition No. 189 of 2015 is the wife of petitioner in Contempt Petition No. 190 of 2015. They are the owners of the flats bearing Nos. A-11 and A-6 situated on the second floor of the New Chandraoday Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. as specifically mentioned in the cause title of the suits. Both the flats had 180 sq. ft. terrace each, adjoining to the flats. Both the petitioners covered their respective terraces with asbestos sheets. In respect of this coverage of the terraces, Municipal Corporation was pleased to pass an order dated 23.04.2013 for demolition of the unauthorized covering of the terraces. The petitioners, hence, filed two separate suits bearing L.C. Suit No. 2477 of 2013 and Suit No. 2476 of 2013, inter alia, praying for permanent injunction restraining respondent-Municipal Corporation from implementing the impugned order dated 23.04.2013. Along with suits, the petitioners filed Notices of Motion Nos. 2303 of 2013 and 2304 of 2013 seeking relief of interim injunction. In those Notices of Motion ad interim relief was rejected. The petitioners, therefore, preferred the appeals against the order and in those appeals the ad interim relief was granted by this Court on 24.05.2013 in terms of prayer clause (b). The said relief was confirmed by this Court by order dated 19.09.2013 and directed to be continued till the disposal of the Notices of Motion by the Trial Court.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioners is that despite this order of interim injunction granted and confirmed by this Court till disposal of the Notices of Motion and despite the fact that the Notices of Motion are yet not disposed of and pending before the Trial Court, the respondent herein issued notice dated 28.11.2014 under Section 53(1) of the MRTP Act calling upon the petitioners to restore their flats to original status, in accordance with the plan approved by the Executive Engineer while sanctioning the building proposal. Subsequent thereto, on 11.03.2015 the petitioners also received notice under Section 488 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, intimating the petitioners that the Assistant Engineer (B & F)-I, 'N' Ward shall visit the premises of the petitioners on 13.03.2015 for the purpose of inspecting and taking measurement of unauthorized work, if any. According to the petitioners, therefore, the respondent-Municipal Corporation has committed breach of the ad interim relief granted by this Court on 24.05.2013 and confirmed on 19.09.2013. Hence, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent is liable for intentionally, willfully and consciously disobeying the order of this Court.