Bombay High Court
SHREE KUTCHHI BHANUSHALI SEVA SAMAJ TRUST THR.ITS DINESH CHANDRAversusTAHIRA RAMZAN ALI MOHAMMED YAQOOB
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- MILIND N JADHAV
Holding
The appeal is disposed without merit, directing the trial court to determine the notice of motion independently and refrain from coercive action pending its decision.
Summary
The appellant, Tahira Ramzan Ali Mohammed Yaqoob, challenged an ad‑interim order issued by the trial court following a show‑cause notice and speaking order from the Designated Officer of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. The appellant sought relief against coercive steps being taken against her structure, while a landowner intervened seeking to protect his interests. The High Court examined whether the trial court should consider the appellant's material and decide the pending notice of motion without being influenced by the impugned order. It directed the trial court to hear both parties, including the intervener, and to pass a reasoned order within four weeks, granting the appellant leave to file a rejoinder. The Court also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the appellant’s structure for one week after any adverse final order. Without addressing the merits, the appeal and both interim applications were disposed.
Issues considered
- What procedural steps must the trial court follow in adjudicating the notice of motion after an ad‑interim order?
- Whether the trial court should be insulated from the observations made in the impugned ad‑interim order?
- Whether coercive measures can be taken against the appellant’s structure pending final determination?
Subjects
- interim order
- show‑cause notice
- municipal corporation
- landowner intervention
- appellate jurisdiction
- coercive steps
- notice of motion
Judgment
14. AO-15-2026.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 15 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 136 OF 2026
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 137 OF 2026
Tahira Ramzan Ali Mohammed Yaqoob .. Appellant
Versus
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
& Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w Mr. Rajkumar Awasthi i/by Mr.
Manish Tomar, Advocates for Appellant
Mr. Sachin Vajale, Advocates for Respondents
Mr. Pradip Thorat a/w Mr. Aniesh Jadhav, Mr. Karan Gajra, Mr.
Avinash Bailmare a/w Mr. Shubham B.Choudhar i/by Mr. Nikhil
Adkine, Advocates for Intervener
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : JANUARY 17, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Chandrachud, learned Advocate for Appellant; Mr.
Vajale, learned Advocate for Respondents - Corporation and Mr.
Thorat, learned Advocate for Intervener. It is mentioned at the time of
discharging the Board due to apprehension expressed by the
Appellant. Mr. Thorat has appeared after the order is dictated in
Court on behalf of the intervener - landowner. I have also heard him
on his objections.
1 of 3
14. AO-15-2026.odt
2. Challenge in the present Appeal from Order (AO) is to the ad-
interim order passed by the learned Trial Court pursuant to the
issuance of show-cause-notice and speaking order passed by the
Designated Officer of the Corporation. Suit proceeding has been filed.
It is prima facie seen that the material which is produced by Appellant
- Org. Plaintiff is required to be considered by the learned Trial Court
in accordance with law. Considering that impugned order is an ad-
interim order and Notice of Motion is pending final hearing, the
learned Trial Court is directed to determine the Notice of Motion and
pass appropriate reasoned speaking order after considering the case of
Plaintiff and Corporation. Learned Trial Court shall also hear the
landowner who has filed Chamber Summons seeking intervention in
the Suit while deciding the Notice of Motion. Learned Trial Court is
directed to decide the Notice of Motion as expeditiously as possible
and in any event within a period of four weeks from today. Leave to
file rejoinder is granted to the Plaintiff to the affidavit in reply of the
Corporation.
3. Learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the
observations made in the impugned order and accordingly determine
the same.
4. In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the
structure of the Appellant and further for a period of one week after
2 of 3
14. AO-15-2026.odt
passing of the final order in the Notice of Motion if the said order is
adverse to the Plaintiff.
5. Without expressing any opinion on merits, present Appeal from
Order stands disposed of in the above terms. Both Interim
Applications are also disposed.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
AMBERKAR
MOHAN Date:
AMBERKAR 2026.01.17
16:32:00
+0530
3 of 3
Checking your session…