1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY & ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3305 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 2352 OF 2009 Harshad Smruti CHS Ltd. & Anr. ... Plaintiffs. V/s. Kulsum I. Dayatar & Ors. ... Defendants. Mr. M.P. Vashi for the Plaintiffs. None for the Defendants. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 07th DECEMBER 2009. P.C. :- Mr. Vashi states that despite remaining present in the Court and stating that they are interested in amicable settlement, the Defendants have not pursued the settlement talks further. They made payment of a sum of Rs.25,000/- but later on did not respond. 2. Mr. Vashi submits that both the allegations in the plaint and the statement in the affidavit in support have not been denied. This is a matter where, in a Co-operative Housing Society’s premises, there is a garage admeasuring about 160 sq.ft. The garage was earlier occupied by a member together with the flat. Thereafter, the Defendants are falsely claiming to have purchased this garage and are using it for commercial purpose. There is an open space in the front and rear side of the garage which is likely to be encroached upon. Further, Mr. Vashi points out that in the affidavit it has been clearly stated 2 that the Defendants are carrying on commercial activities/tailoring business. They have constructed the lavatory in the premises without obtaining the consent and approval of the Society. The Municipal Corporation permission is also not obtained. 3. There is an apprehension that there would be a further encroachment. 4. From the order dated 25th September 2009, it is apparent that the Defendants had notice of the present proceedings, they even appeared on 9th October 2009 and on the further dates it was stated that the settlement talks are in progress. 5. Thus, the Defendants are aware of these proceedings. There is no affidavit in reply. A prima-facie case is made out by the Plaintiff. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the Society which is the owner of the property. Considering that the commercial activities are being conducted, even the irreparable loss and injury will be caused to the Society. 6. In such circumstances, the Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a). Liberty to apply for further reliefs in terms of the prayers of the Notice of Motion at a subsequent stage. No order as to costs. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)