Bombay High Court

NEUMEE ELEGANCE CHS. LIMITED, THR. ITS CHAIRMAN/ SECRETARYversusTHE BABULNATH ASHRAM CHS LIMITED,THR. ITS CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY AND ANR

Decided: 2 February 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: ARIF S DOCTOR

Holding

The appeal is dismissed, and the trial court is directed to proceed with the suit without granting unnecessary adjournments.

Summary

The appellant, Neumee Elegance Co-operative Ltd., claimed entitlement to a parking area that it alleged lay within the demarcated premises of the first respondent, Babulnath Ashram Co-operative Ltd. The dispute arose after development work by the second respondent, the BMC, which the appellant said gave it a right to the parking space. The appellant's application for interim relief was rejected on 7 January 2019, and the suit proceeded to the evidence stage. The appellant appealed the order, seeking direction for the trial court to continue the suit without granting further adjournments. The court disposed of both the civil application and the appeal, effectively rejecting the appellant's request for further relief and ordering the trial court to proceed without unnecessary adjournments.

Issues considered

Whether the appellant is entitled to the disputed parking area within the first respondent's demarcated premises
Whether the trial court should be directed to proceed with the suit without granting further adjournments

Subjects

parking rights
co-operative society
interim relief
adjournments
civil appeal

Judgment

                                            1/2                 11-AO-389-2019.DOC



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 389 OF 2019
Neumee Elegance Chs. Limited,
Thr. Its Chairman/ Secretary                                          ...Appellant
          Versus
The Babulnath Ashram Chs
Limited,Thr. Its Chairman/Secretary And Anr                           ...Respondents
                                         WITH
                        CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 464 OF 2019
                                            IN
                       APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 389 OF 2019
                                       _______
Mr. B. P. Pandey a/w Mr. Shyam K. Tripathi i/b Vivek B. Pandey, for the
Appellant.
Mr. Omar Khaiyam Shaikh i/b Vijay Chavan, for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Swatesh Tripathi i/b R. M. Upadhyay, for Respondent No.2.
Mr. D. R. Kawale, for the Respondent-BMC.
                                       _______


                                     CORAM        :      ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.
                                     DATE         :      2nd FEBRUARY, 2026.


P.C.
1.        The dispute between the parties is that, pursuant to the development

carried out by Respondent No.2, the Appellant claims entitlement to a certain

parking area which according to him lies within the area demarcated for the

first Respondent-Society.

2.        The Appellant's motion for interim relief has been rejected on 7 th January

2019. Given that, the suit is now at the stage of evidence. This Appeal From

Order can be disposed of by directing the trial Court to proceed with the suit,



Vaibhav
                                          2/2                   11-AO-389-2019.DOC



ensuring that no unnecessary adjournments shall be granted.

3.        Furthermore, learned counsel for the Respondent-Society submits that,

pending the outcome of the suit, the parking area will not in any manner be

dealt with, which he submits, even otherwise cannot be done.

4.        The Civil Application as also Appeal From Order is disposed of.




                                                               [ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.]




Vaibhav

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…