IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY S.C. ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005respectively) are illegal and void. He also sought perpetualinjunction restraining the defendants from implementingimpugned notice and impugned order.2. The brief facts, leading to the case of plaintiff are asunder:3. The plaintiff is a registered Partnership Firm and runs aRestaurant by name and style “Jazz By The Bay”(formerlyknown as “Talk of Town”) at Ground floor, Soona Mahal, NetajiSubhash Road,k Mumbai400 020 (hereinafter referred as “suitpremises”). The building belongs to the Soona Mahal CoOperative Housing Society and the plaintiff's Restaurantpremises i.e. suit premises is owned by M/s. J.N. Nazir andothers. Plaintiff is tenant of the said premises since 1968. Thelandlords were carrying on the business of Restaurant in thesuit premises in the name of “Parsian Dairy”. After the plaintifftook over the business, the name was changed to “Jazz By TheBay”. The restaurant comprises of licensed area of 366.53 sq.meters and defendant Corporation has since 195758 grantedall necessary licenses to carry on restaurant business and alsothe structure is assessed to the taxes. The licensed area of thesuit premises, which was originally an open space in front ofrestaurant, was permitted to be covered by awning. Thedefendant raised the dispute about the said awning many timesand then withdrew subsequently. By his letter dated 1.8.1956
3SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005addressed by Collector of Bombay to Mr. F.C. Sidhwa andothers, the then lessees of Plot No. 203 of the building SoonMahal, the Collector granted permission for the use of frontopen space to the lessee and a permission was also accorded toput canvas shelter. A license fees of Rs. 200/ per annum wascharged for the said permission.4. By Deed of License dated 30.07.1958, the Governor ofBombay granted to the then lessees of the aforesaid property,permission to use the open space in front of the demisedpremises for the purposes of business on payment of a licensefee of Rs. 200/ per annum and it was provided that the openspace could be covered by some temporary structure forproviding shelter from rain and sun. Pursuant to the saidpermission, predecessor in title of plaintiff put canvas shelterbut it was not sufficient to provide adequate protection. Hence,they made application on 03.06.1957 to construct a metal Ajaxawning over the front open space and it was approved byArchitect to Government by letter dated 20.6.1957 bearingReference No.P43/1376 of 1957. By letter dated 04.02.1960addressed by Collector's Office(Survey Branch) to the lessee,the Collector placed on record that he had no objection to thecovering of open space by metal awning as permitted byGovernment Architect subject to the payment of fee of Rs.100/ per annum. A demand of Rs. 400/ for the period 1957 to1960 was made and it was complied. On 9.11.1968 plaintiff
Page 1: 1SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005IN THE COU
Page 5 and 6: 5SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005deteriorat
Page 7 and 8: 7SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005arrears of
Page 9 and 10: 9SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005impugned n
Page 11 and 12: 11SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005Hence, pr
Page 13 and 14: 13SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005addressed
Page 15 and 16: 15SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005alteratio
Page 17 and 18: 17SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005parties i
Page 19 and 20: 19SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005by Archit
Page 21 and 22: 21SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005certifica
Page 23 and 24: 23SC Suit No. 2572 of 200524. The e
Page 25 and 26: 25SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005order is
Page 27 and 28: 27SC Suit No. 2572 of 20054.4.1995)
Page 29 and 30: 29SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005of quasi
Page 31 and 32: 31SC Suit No. 2572 of 2005on the pa

IN THE COURT OF JUDGE, CITY CIVIL COURT AT BOMBAY S.C. ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?