Dismissed
mr . v. krishnamoorthy ,sole pro. of m/s meena advertisers v muncipal corporation of gr.,mum
Bombay HCAPP/862/2006
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
IN THE
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-: 1 :-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
APPEAL NO. 862 of 2006
IN
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3791 OF 2006
IN
SUIT NO. 3336 OF 2006
Mr. V. Krishnamoorthy.. ....... Appellant.
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai.... .. .... ... Respondent.
Mr. T. N. Subramaniam, Senior Counsel with
Mr. S.K.Sthalekar for the Appellant.
Mr. A.Y.Sakhare, Senior Counsel, with Mr. K. N.
Gaikwad for the Respondent.
CORAM : R. M. LODHA, and
S. A. BOBDE, JJ.
DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2006.
P.C.:
We heard Mr. T. N. Subramaniam, Senior Counsel
for the appellant and Mr. A. Y. Sakhare, Senior
Counsel for the respondent.
2. The appeal is from the order whereby the learned
-: 2 :-
motion Judge refused to grant an ad-interim relief to
plaintiff concerning assessment charges. We find no
justifiable reason to take a different view.
3. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed in limine.
4. However, it is made clear that in case the
appellant succeeds in the notice of motion or
ultimately in the suit, the assessment charges paid by
the appellant shall be returned by the respondent
Corporation within 15 (fifteen) days of such order
along with simple interest at the rate of 9% p.a.
from the date of such deposit.
Sd/-
(R. M. LODHA, J.)
Sd/-
(S. A. BOBDE, J.)
V. Krishnamoorthy
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
R. M. LODHA
S. A. BOBDE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court