Sayyed 1-AO.274.2019.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.274 OF 2019 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.323 OF 2019 Premnath Jaiswai & Ors. ...Appellants/Applicants Versus Northern Star Heights Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.324 OF 2019 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.274 OF 2019 Northern Star Heights Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. ...Applicant (Org. Respondent No.1) IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: Premnath Jaiswai & Ors. ...Appellants Versus Northern Star Heights Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents _____________________________________________________ Mr. Amogh A. Singh a/w Mr. Nirav N. Karia i/by Mr. Bhavin R. Bhatia for the Appellants/Applicants in AO/274/2019 & CAF/323/2019. Mr. Anand Mishra i/by Mr. Ashok M. Saraogi for the Respondents and Applicant in CAF/324/2019. _____________________________________________________ CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J. DATE : 19 NOVEMBER 2025 ORDER: 1. This appeal challenges an order dated 24 October 2018 passed by the City Civil Court, Mumbai whereby the motion taken out by the plaintiff-respondent was made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b) which restrained the original defendants from causing any 1 of 3 2025:BHC-AS:50030 Sayyed 1-AO.274.2019.doc obstruction in the plaintiffs completing the building as per the plans approved by the Corporation. 2. In the impugned order, in paragraph 3, the learned Judge has recorded that the consent terms has been entered into between the plaintiff and some of the members of the defendant-society. On a query being raised as to where there is a reference of the consent terms in the plaint or in the affidavit in support of the motion, both the learned counsel could not point out the same. The details of this consent terms have not been mentioned in the impugned order. Even before me, the said consent terms have not been produced. 3. The learned counsel for the plaintiff, however, points out that the consent terms may be at Page 142 of the present appeal and the original defendants in their reply to motion has also referred to this consent term. From the said consent terms, it is not clear whether the present plaintiff was a party or not. The name of the plaintiff in the present suit is also not appearing therein. Therefore, it is not clear that whether the present plaintiff was a party to the consent terms shown to me at Page 142. In any case, this would have to be examined and the learned Judge has not examined the same before giving his finding in paragraph 3. 4. In paragraph 7, the learned Judge records the submissions made by the plaintiff that the development rights have been transferred in favour of the plaintiff by transferring the IOD and the CC and the construction is started as per the order of the Court. On a query being raised, both the learned counsel could not show me this averment by the plaintiff in the plaint, nor the order of the Court which is referred to in paragraph 7. There are no details of which order the references is in paragraph 7. 2 of 3 Sayyed 1-AO.274.2019.doc 5. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant submits that what is recorded in paragraph 10 that the defendant nos.6 to 10, 13 and 15 has appointed the plaintiff for redevelopment of the property is not correct recording of the submission. In my view, if this submission has been wrongly recorded, then the correct approach for the appellant was to approach the same Judge and seek a rectification. The said submission that it has been wrongly recorded cannot be canvassed before this Court. 6. The conclusion given in paragraph 12 is based on what has been recorded by the learned Judge in paragraphs 3, 7 and 10 on which I have already given my views above. 7. In view of above, the impugned order dated 24 October 2018 is quashed and set aside and the Notice of Motion No.2022 of 2016 is remanded back to the Civil Civil Court. The learned Judge will hear both the parties and record the submission in their presence so that the grievance made today would not arise in future. If any consent terms or the Court orders are relied upon by the parties then details of the same may be given in the order disposing of the motion. 8. The parties are directed to appear before City Civil Court on 1 December 2025 at 11:00 a.m. with the present order so that the learned Judge can fix up the date for hearing of the motion. The present suit is of 2016 and, therefore, the City Civil Court is requested to hear the motion as expeditiously as possible. 9. The appeal is disposed of in above terms. Consequently, civil application does not survive and is disposed of. [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ] 3 of 3 Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 20/11/2025 15:22:10