Partly allowed

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. State of Maharashtra and 3 Others

Bombay HC7 Sept 2010NMW/459/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Notice of Motion permitting the petitioner to place a mosquito-proof lid over a water cistern in the presence of a state officer to file a compliance report.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to place a mosquito-proof lid over the water cistern in the presence of a state officer with a directive to file a compliance report.

Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs State of… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

jpc/-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 459 OF 2010 IN

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 2644 OF 2008

¶6

Life Insurance Corporation of India .. Petitioner Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra .. Petitioner

¶8

Mr. Omprakash Jha i/by M/s The Law Point for the petitioner Ms. L. T. Satelkar , AGP for the Respondent State Ms. T. H. Puranik for the Respondent Corporation Mr. S. M. Pawar, Junir Officer, D-Ward of the Corporation

¶9

CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 7th September, 2010

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

By this Notice of Motion, the Petitioner has sought permission to place mosquito proof lid over the water cistern constructed by the Respondent No.3 in the premises under dispute. It is further prayed that the lid be allowed to be placed in the presence of an officer of Respondent No.2 and the said officer be directed to file compliance report of Notice dated 27th June, 2009 before the 41st Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mumbai before whom the Respondent No.3 has lodged a prosecution under Section 471 read with 481 B of the MMC Act.

¶12

¶13

This Notice of Motion was called out on 5th September, 2010, when the Advocate for Respondent No.3 had applied for time. The matter was therefore kept today for hearing. Today, none appears for the Respondent No.3. The learned Advocate for the Corporation states that she has no objection if the Motion is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). She submits that Mr. S.M.Pawar, officer of the Respondent No.2 shall remain present on 8th September, 2010 at 2 p.m. and that the Petitioner may place the mosquito proof lid over the water cistern in his presence to enable him to file the compliance report of the Notice dated 27th June, 2009 before the 41st Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mumbai.

¶14

In view thereof, the Notice of Motion is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). The Applicant/Petitioner is directed to remain present at the site at 2 p.m. on 8th September and contact Mr. Manish Ratnakar, Asstt. Administrative Officer of LIC of India. After the mosquito proof lid is placed over the water cistern Mr. S. M. Pawar shall file report of compliance of notice dated 27th June, 2009 before the 41st Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mumbai.

¶15

Notice of motion is accordingly disposed of.

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. State of Maharashtra and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. State of Maharashtra and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Starlight Systesms Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mariot Hotels India Pvt. Ltd.

Shreedhar C. Shetty Vs the Commissioner of Police and Anr.

Jabbar Ali Nasir Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

M/S. Indian Smelting and Regining Co. Ltd. Vs Sarva Shramik Sangh

Deutsche Bank Ag, London Vs Pearl Engineering Polymers Limited

Vishnushankar P. Yadav, C/O. Maharashtra Engg. Plastic and General Kamgar Union, Vs M/S. Homa Engineering Works