Petition dismissed by Single Judge hold that since the suit regarding status additions is pending order directing status quo issue is not necessary and matter is kept open for raising pleas in the suit.
Writ petition held not necessary to be entertained and was dismissed as suit was pending with status quo order.
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
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4571 OF 2007
Neel Nandini "B" Coop.
Housing Society & Anr... Petitioners
Versus
Municipal Corporation of
Gr.Mumbai & Ors.
.. Respondents
Mr.R.C.Singh with D.R.Shah for petitioners
Mr.Sanjay Jain i/b. Vinod Mistry & Co. for
respondent Nos. 2 and 3
Mr.A.Y.Sakhare, Senior Advocate for Respondent
No.1.
CORAM :S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATE:17th December 2007
P.C.
.The only apprehension expressed now
before me by Mr.Singh appearing for society is
that despite the suit having been filed by the
society against the alleged illegal
actions/additions/alterations of residential
2
flat, the communication dated 3rd May 2006 by
Dy.Registrar may be misconstrued as a
permission/authority from the Administrator to
the concerned occupants and the Corporation to
regularise the construction/work. It would also
be construed by the Corporation as an act whereby
the society has condoned the alleged additions
and/or alterations.
2.To my mind, it is not necessary to
clarify this aspect inasmuch as the suit is
already filed and the same is pending. I am
informed that there is an order passed by this
Court directing parties to maintain status quo.
The suit is admittedly filed by the society.
During the course of hearing of the same it would
be open for petitioner society to raise
appropriate pleas also with regard to the
authority, power and jurisdiction of the Deputy
Registrar/Administrator to issue such directions.
It would be open for them to urge that such a
3
direction/letter does not bind the Corporation
which is local and planning authority. All such
pleas can be raised during the course of hearing
of the suit and they are expressly kept open. It
is not necessary to entertain this petition.
Petition dismissed.
(S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)
Neel Nandini "B" Coop. Housing Society & Anr
Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai & Ors
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court