WP/6554/2010 : 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6554 OF 2010 Janabai Najmuddin & Anr. ... Petitioners V/s. Noor Abdulkadar Baig & Anr. ... Respondents Mr.P.S. Dani for Petitioners Mr.P.N. Kilpady for Respondents CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: AUGUST 26, 2010 P.C.: 1. The petition has been filed against the appellate order passed by the appeal bench of the Small Causes Court in Appeal No.143 of 2009. By the impugned order, the appeal Court has reversed the order passed by the trial Court on an injunction notice moved by the landlord and has granted mandatory injunctions. These injunctions are to the effect that the petitioners i.e. the tenants are directed to remove the potted plants kept on the parapet walls on the western side of the building below window of the suit premises. The tenants have further been directed to remove the elevation of a concrete strip at the entrance of the suit property. 2. Both the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have found that these two acts of the tenants of maintaining potted plants and of laying a concrete strip at the entrance of the suit property i.e. from the compound wall of the property to the WP/6554/2010 : 2 : entrance of the building have not damaged the building. Yet the appellate Court was of the view that since the landlord had a right to object to these acts of the tenants which were not carried out after obtaining the consent of the landlord. The landlord must have remedy when his legal right had been impinged according to the appellate Court and therefore the injunction was granted. 3. The suit is of the year 1985. In my opinion, rather than going into the niceties of the injunction notice and the order passed by the appellate Court, it would be appropriate to expedite the suit. The injunction granted by the appellate Court is set aside as there is a categoric finding of the appellate Court that the building has not been damaged. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of within the following order: ORDER i) The order of the appellate Court in Appeal No.143 of 2009 is set aside and the injunction granted by it is vacated. However, this does not reflect on the merits of the landlords’ case in the injunction notice. ii) The RAE Suit No.400/1222 of 1985 is expedited. iii) The suit shall be heard and disposed of within six months from today.