1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.1173 OF 2008 Pramukh Vijay Co.op. Housing Society Ltd. ..Appellant. Vs. Association of Vijay Nagar Housing Societies and others. ..Respondents Mr.P.N.Havnur for the Appellant. Mr.Raj Patel i/by Ms.Raji Subramaniam for the Respondents 1 to 3. Mr. Varghis P.N. i/by K.V.Aiyar & Associates for the Respondent No.4. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 14th Sept.2009. PC: 1 This is an appeal filed by the original plaintiff against the rejection of its notice of motion. The plaintiff is one of the member of the respondent No.1- Association. The respondent No.1 is a unregistered association of eight co- 2 operative societies. The dispute pertains to a Gate which is Gate No.3. The relief sought by the plaintiff is by way of mandatory order for opening the said gate. It is not in dispute that, there are separate entry and exit gates being gate Nos. 1 and 2 by which the members of the plaintiff society can have access to their flats. The internal roads are motorable. Advocate for the plaintiff contends that even after the Gate No.3 is opened, the road leading into the society is now not motorable, because according to him society has dug the portion below the gate thereby lowering the level of the land inside the gate No.3. As regards this aspect, no grievance was made to the trial court. Advocate for the appellant states that this event was subsequent. If that be so, such an event cannot be considered in this appeal and cannot be the basis for staying the impugned order. It is seen that, a concession was made by the respondent No.1 in court that if any member of the society makes a request for opening of gate No.3 in case of any 3 emergency, then the said gate will be opened. Grievance made by the appellant is that this order was made unworkable by requirement of respondent No.1 to comply in writing in a proforma form with 24 hours notice. Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1 states that it will not insist on any particular form and if any emergency exists, then Gate No.3 will be opened if written intimation is given to any one out of three members whose names are given by the appellant and if they are unavailable, to the watchman. Statement is accepted. In my view, on the other aspects of the case, this is not a fit case to interfere since relief sought is of mandatory in nature. In view of the acceptance of the aforesaid statement and the arrangement between the parties, appeal stands disposed off. (R.S. MOHITE, J.)