The High Court of Bombay dismissed a writ petition filed to enforce consent terms regarding the development of suit property, holding it was not a fit case for extraordinary jurisdiction when a civil suit already existed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1876 OF 2002
Bhaichand C. Mehta (Premises No.7)
& Ors. ..Petitioners
Vs.
Dattatray Eknath Teredesai & Ors. ..Respondents
-----
Mr.Shailesh B. i/b. Niranjan & Co. for Petitioners
Mr.S.R. Gupta i/b. Mr. G.S. Bhat for Respondent No.1
Mr.R.S. Datar for Respondent Nos.2 & 3
Mr. H.C. Pimple for Respondent Nos.4 & 5
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO &
S.P. KUKDAY, JJ.
DATE: 20TH APRIL, 2005.
P.C.
. There were civil disputes between the
parties. Pursuant to which the Petitioners herein
had filed Suit No.2358 of 2000. Consent terms have
been filed therein which amongst other terms
includes clause 14 which sets out that consent of
the Petitioners for development of suit property by
constructing Eknath Apartment and extension of
Sumati Apartment. The present petition has been
filed in the matter of construction of Sumati
Apartment extension and the contention raised was
that the Defendant no.1 agreed to shift the pump
room, toilet and water tank existing between Sumati
Apartment and Eknath Apartment. Respondent Nos. 2
and 3 have filed affidavits setting out their stand.
. In our opinion this will not be a fit case
2
to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction, more so
because of the earlier suit and the consent terms.
It will be open to the Petitioner either to file
proceedings in execution or if there be subsequent
events or cause of action or to file a suit against
the Respondents.
. With the above order Writ Petition stands
disposed of. No order as to costs.
(F.I.REBELLO,J.)
(S.P. KUKDAY,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction to grant relief concerning construction disputes and consent terms.
Bhaichand C. Mehta (Premises No.7) & Ors.
Dattatray Eknath Teredesai & Ors.
F.I. Rebello
S.P. Kukday
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court