IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1113 of 2006. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1113 of 2006. NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1113 of 2006. IN IN IN SUIT NO.858 of 2006. SUIT NO.858 of 2006. SUIT NO.858 of 2006. Shivai Co-op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. ..Plaintiff versus Raut & Dadarkar Associates & Others ..Defendants Mr.H.S.S.Murthy for the plaintiffs Mr.Rakeshkumar i/b. M/s. Legal Vision for the Defendant Nos.5 to 8 Mr.R.M.Pandey for the defendant No.10 CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 11th February, 2009. DATED : 11th February, 2009. DATED : 11th February, 2009. P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsels on both the sides. As of today learned Counsel for the plaintiffs states that he be granted liberty to withdraw this motion so far as prayer clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) with liberty to take out fresh motion by taking fresh look to the plaint and if necessary apply for amendment. 2. So far as prayer clause (a) is concerned, Counsels for the defendant Nos.1 to 11 state that as of today cars of total outsiders are not being parked at the instance of any of the defendants and -2- therefore there is no need to pass any injunction in terms of prayer clause (a). 3. So far as prayer clause (a) is concerned, I am inclined to pass an order of injunction restraining the outsiders from parking vehicles in the property in respect of which the present suit is filed. It is clarified that the defendants No.1 to 11 can park the cars owned by them in the usual course of enjoyment of the property in their capacity as developer. Appropriate Order shall be passed hereunder. 4. So far as prayer clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) are concerned, liberty will have to be granted and ad-interim order granted in favour of the plaintiffs on 26.4.2006 will have to be continued so far as prayer clause (b) of the present notice of motion for some time to enable the plaintiffs to apply for amendment/ apply for appropriate interim reliefs. 5. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid, I pass the following Order: -3- ORDER i. The defendant Nos.1 to 11 are restrained from allowing the outsiders to park the vehicles in the property in regard to which the suit is filed. ii. The defendants No.1 to 11 are permitted to park their vehicles, in view of the fact that they are the developers in respect of the property in regard to which the suit is filed. So far as prayer clauses (b), (c), (d) and (e) is concerned, motion is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to take out fresh motion after reconsidering the entire matter and if necessary by applying for amendment of the plaint, which amendment application ofcourse will have to be considered on merits. In order to protect the interest of the plaintiffs during the time the plaintiffs would be moving for appropriate interim reliefs, ad-interim order dated 26.4.2006 in relation to prayer clause (b) of the prsent motion will remain in force till 9.4.2009. There shall be no order as to costs. Motion disposed of accordingly. . Suit to come up in usual course. -4- (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.) (R.Y.Ganoo, J.)