Dismissed

Indrapal Bhatia v. the Municipal Corpn. of Gr.Bombay

Bombay HC24 Aug 2005FA/56/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appeal as it lacked merit regarding the unauthorized use of gallery premises for business. While the appeal was dismissed, the court granted liberty to the appellant to apply for regularization of the premises.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to apply for regularization within three weeks; stay granted for nine weeks pending outcome of application.

Indrapal Bhatia Vs the Municipal Corpn. of Gr.Bombay — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

¶4

 FIRST APPEAL NO.56 OF 2005.

¶5

 Indrapal Bhatia : Appellant.
 (Org.Plaintiff)

¶6

 versus

¶7

 The Municipal Corporation of

¶8

 Greater Bombay. : Respondent.

¶9

 Ms.Anita Dwivedi for the appellant.

¶10

 Mr.J.J.Xavier for the respondents-BMC

¶11

CORAM : D.G.DESHPANDE,J.

¶12

 DATED : 24th August 2005.

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

 1. In order to properly appreciate the
 controversy I had appointed a commissioner to
 visit the suit site and prepare a plan. It is
 clear from the sketch plan that the suit premises
 are in the gallery. The documents, relied upon

¶15

¶16

 by the appellant, do not show that it is an
 authorised structure. In any case, the gallery
 cannot be used for any business purpose like this
 i.e. one to which the plaintiff has put the
 same. Therefore, there is no merit in this
 appeal It is dismissed.

¶17

 2. However, looking to the fact that the
 plaintiff is doing his business since 1981,
 according to the plaintiff’s case, liberty is
 given to the plaintiff to apply to the Municipal
 Corporation of Greater Bombay for regularisation.
 He should apply to the Executive Engineer,
 Building & Proposal, City, within three weeks
 from today. The said authority shall decide said
 application within six weeks thereafter. The
 authority will not be influenced by the findings
 and decision of this Court. If the application
 is not made within the aforesaid period, there
 will be no stay. Otherwise, there will be stay
 for nine weeks. Ultimate result will be binding
 upon the appellant. The application should be in
 a form prescribed by the Municipal Corporation of
 Greater Bombay in this regard. Fees of the
 commissioner to be paid to the commissioner.

¶18

¶19

[D.G.DESHPANDE,J]

Indrapal Bhatia v. the Municipal Corpn. of Gr.Bombay

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indrapal Bhatia v. the Municipal Corpn. of Gr.Bombay

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anjana Prasad Bachute Vs Prasad Suresh Bachute

Anjana Prasad Bachute Vs Prasad Suresh Bachute

Union of India Vs Taramati @Tarabai Sukhdeo Mane

Union of India. Vs M/S.Cummins Diesel Sales and Services(India)Ltd.andANR

The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Shweta Anil Tekade and Ors.

Shankar Mahadu Palde and Ors. Vs Chandrabhaga Arjun Mondhe and Anr.