1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. Notice of Motion No.198 of 2007 IN Suit No.76 of 2007 Mr.Manohar K. Kadam. ... ... Plaintiff v/s. Rajeev Thakur & ors. ... ... Defendants Mr.Deepak Chitnis i/by M/s.Chitnis- Chiparikar & Co. for plaintiff. Mr.S.A.Bhalwal i/by M/s.Vyas & Bhalwal & Co. for defendant Nos.1 & 2. ----- CORAM : SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J. Dated : 27 th March 2008 P.C. : 1. This Suit was filed initially in the Bombay City Civil Court, Bombay, under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, for possession of stilt car parking space No.4. The plaintiff has been put in possession of the car parking space under an order passed in the Notice of Motion taken out in the Bombay City Civil Court. 2. Since the valuation of the Suit exceeded the pecuniary jurisdiction of that Court, the Plaint has been returned to proper Court for filing under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Plaint has thereafter been filed in 2 this Court. Ad-valorem Court fee has been paid. By an ad- interim order in this Notice of Motion dated 12.12.2006, the City Civil Court order dated 23.9.2005 has been continued pending the suit. The order dated 23.9.2005 has not been challenged. That order must, therefore, continue pending the suit. 3. The Suit is in respect of car parking space No.4. Advocates of the parties have shown me the plan of the suit property. The plaintiff's right to park his car in car parking space No.4, without any obstruction thereto from the defendants, has been upheld and that right continues pending the suit. The defendants claim their right to car parking space No.5. The plaintiff does not claim any right to car parking space No.5. Subject to the plaintiff's right of user and possession of the open car parking space No.4 without any obstruction, the defendants may use car parking space No.5. 4. It is clarified that any obstruction to the plaintiff of user of the car parking space No.4 would tantamount to contempt of the order of the Bombay City Civil Court, which has thereafter been confirmed by this Court. 5. Consequently, the Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayers (b) and (c). No order as to costs. 3 (SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)