Ashis Kumar Chakraborty, J. - (1.) The petitioners claiming to be the co-owners in respect of two flats of the first floor of the building, namely Express Towers at 42A, Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the "said building") have filed the suit praying for, leave under Order 1 Rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure on behalf and/or for the benefit of the other owners of different portions of the first floor of the said building and claiming, inter alia, framing of a scheme of management by this Court for the purpose of maintenance and management for providing essential services like electricity, water and other allied services for the benefit of all the owners of the said building and a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants respondents from disrupting and preventing the owners of the flats of the said building in relation to essential services like water supply, lift, electricity and other services and further reliefs. In this application, the petitioners have prayed for an order of mandatory injunction commanding the respondents to restore supply of electricity to their flats on the first floor of the said building and for appointment of a fit and proper person as an administrator for the purpose of administering the maintenance of the said building.
(2.) Mr. Arik Banerjee, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners have pressed for an ad interim order of mandatory injunction directing the respondents to forthwith restore supply of electricity to their said flats of the first floor of the said building. However, in response to a query made by this Court with regard to maintainability of the suit filed for framing a scheme of management for the purpose of maintenance and management for providing all essential services to the owners of the said building, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners could not point out any provision of law which entitled the petitioners to maintain the suit for framing a scheme as claimed in this suit. Further, it is settled law that an interim order of mandatory injunction can be passed by a Court only in exceptional circumstances which are clear and the materials on record clearly justify a finding that the status quo has been altered by one of the parties to the litigation and the interests of justice demands that the status quo ante be restored by way of interim mandatory injunction.
(3.) Having considered the materials on record, I do not find that the petitioners have been able to make out any case to fulfil the above condition to obtain any ad-interim order of mandatory injunction.;