Mumbai, Dec 25: In a significant ruling that underscores the protection of civil rights amid bitter family feuds, the Bombay High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Zenobia Poonawala and Rohinton Poonawala, upholding a trial court order that prevents them from obstructing other residents’ access to essential building services.
Civil and Possessory Rights Take Priority, Says Court
Justice Kamal Khata, on December 23, emphasised that even in the face of protracted litigation between siblings, the court must prioritise the enforcement of basic “civil and possessory rights”.
Dispute Centres on Rutton Manor in Colaba
The dispute centres on Rutton Manor, a ground-plus-four building in Colaba. The legal battle pits Zenobia Poonawala against her brother, Dr Rustom Farhad Ginwalla, and several other occupants.
Ginwalla and others alleged that Zenobia and Rohinton Poonawala had engaged in “wrongful conduct and nuisance”, specifically by locking the elevator at the fourth floor, barring access to the common terrace, water tanks and meter rooms, and even preventing sewage cleaning services.
Court Notes Age and Health of Residents
The court noted the physical toll of the dispute, observing that most residents are of advanced age and suffer from ailments that make climbing stairs to their respective flats nearly impossible.
Poonawallas Raise Jurisdiction Objection
The Poonawallas, represented by Akash Rebello, argued that the suit was not maintainable in a civil court, claiming that Dr Ginwalla was merely a “tenant” and that eviction suits were already pending in the Small Causes Court.
Plaintiff Claims Co-Ownership of Property
However, senior counsel Virag Tulzapurkar, appearing for Dr Ginwalla, countered that his client is a co-owner of the building, having received a 55 per cent interest via a gift deed from his father. He argued that the Poonawallas were making living conditions “hazardous and oppressive”.
Court Rejects Technical Objections
Justice Khata rejected the technical objections regarding jurisdiction, clarifying that suits seeking injunctive relief to protect civil rights belong in the City Civil Court.
The judge remarked, “The submissions advanced by Rebello (for the Poonawallas) have missed the wood for the trees… The real grievance of the defendants pertains to payment of maintenance charges, an issue which stands adequately addressed.”
Also Watch:
Appeal Dismissed, No Stay Granted
The court further noted the “unfortunate” nature of the sibling rivalry but refused to interfere with the lower court’s discretion. Concluding that the trial court’s view was “consonant with the facts”, Justice Khata dismissed the appeal and rejected a request for a stay on the order.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/