: 1 : SD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2498 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2498 OF 2007 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2498 OF 2007 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL NO.1650 OF 2007 FIRST APPEAL NO.1650 OF 2007 FIRST APPEAL NO.1650 OF 2007 Sheetal Palace Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd., . Mumbai ...Applicant V/s. Veena Enterprises & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.V.S. Kapse, Advocate, for the Applicant. Mr.S.R. Mishra, Advocate, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3(e). CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. CORAM : ABHAY S. OKA, J. DATE : 4TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 4TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 4TH MARCH, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. This is an application by the appellant-plaintiff. In a suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff, the Trial Court has passed a Decree, the operative part of which reads thus :- "Defendant Nos.1 to 3 are directed to execute the Conveyance Deed of the flats agreed to be sold to the members of the Plaintiff’s Society or in favour of the Plaintiff’s Society as per the terms of Agreement of Sale. Defendant Nos.1 to 3 are directed to pay all the dues and taxes to the Defendant No.4/Corporation till the Defendant Nos.1 to 3 were in possession of the flats of the members of the Plaintiffs : 2 : society." 2. The case of the applicant is that the 1st to 3rd respondents who are the builders are possessing large number of flats in the building and they are not paying property taxes in respect of the said flats. It is the case of the applicants that from the date of registration of the applicant-society, i.e. from 1993, the applicants have paid taxes up-to-date in respect of those flats which are in possession of its members. According to the applicants, they could not pay taxes in respect of flats in possession of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 as the said respondents have not paid taxes in respect of the flats in their possession. 3. According to the case made out by the Municipal Corporation (4th respondent), total outstanding amount of taxes is Rs.64,26,449/-. Out of the said amount, the applicants have paid Rs.14,50,000/-. The applicants are disputing the figure given by the 4th respondent. There is an affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent setting out that the liability of the 1st to 3rd respondents in respect of the premises held by them from 1st April, 2003 to 31st March, 2008 is in the sum of Rs.15,39,652/-, out : 3 : of which the said respondents have paid a sum of Rs.4,58,552/-. In the affidavit a statement has been made that the balance amount of Rs.10,81,100/- will be paid by them directly to the 4th respondent within a period of eight weeks from today. 4. Prayer (a) of this application is for stay of directions issued by the Trial Court against the 1st to 3rd respondents to pay all the dues and taxes to the 4th respondent till the 1st to 3rd respondents were in possession of the flats of the members of the applicant-society. Prayer (b) is for seeking a direction against the 1st to 3rd respondents to pay all the dues to the 4th respondent for the period from 1992 till registration of the appellant-society. Prayer (c) is for directing the 4th respondent to give water connection to the applicant-society. 5. This situation is brought about as a result of the serious disputes between the 1st to 3rd respondents and the applicant-society. There is a dispute between the applicants and the 1st to 3rd respondents as regards payment of dues of the 4th respondent. 6. The 1st to 3rd respondents will have to : 4 : obviously comply with the Decree which is referred to above as regards payment of dues and taxes in favour of the 4th respondent. The said 1st to 3rd respondents will have to regularly pay the Municipal taxes in respect of the flats held by them to the 4th respondent. 7. The members of the applicants are in possession of their respective flats. In my view, the 4th respondent cannot withhold regular water connection to the applicants. The 4th respondent can always take appropriate steps in accordance with law for recovery of the outstanding dues, if any, against the concerned persons. 8. Hence, I pass following order :- "O R D E R" "O R D E R" "O R D E R" (a). Prayer (a) is rejected. (b). The applicant-society will continue to pay Municipal taxes regularly and punctually in respect of the flats and premises in possession of their members. The 1st to 3rd respondents shall pay municipal taxes in : 5 : respect of flats in their possession. (c). The 4th respondent is directed to grant regular water connection to the applicants subject to compliance with requisite terms and conditions. (d). This order will not preclude the 4th respondent from initiating appropriate proceedings for recovery of dues towards property taxes. However, such proceedings shall not be initiated for a period of eight weeks from today. (e). There will be no orders as to costs. [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.] [ABHAY S. OKA, J.]