Disposed

Akash Omprakash Somani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC2 Dec 2014WP/2132/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition regarding an allotted industrial plot. Petitioner claimed a nallah reduces usable area. High Court granted liberty to submit representation and directed authorities to consider it within four weeks without disturbing possession.

What did the court decide?

Courtesy granted for petitioner to submit representation. Authorities directed to evaluate grievance within 4 weeks without disturbing occupation of plot.

Akash Omprakash Somani Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

48 sr. no..odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2132 OF 2013

¶5

AKASH OMPRAKASH SOMANI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Pawan K. Lakhotiya, KDL Associates. Mr. G.R. Ingole, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. S.S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5.

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 2ND DECEMBER, 2014.

¶8

PER COURT:

¶9

1] Heard Advocate Lakhotiya for petitioner, Advocate Dande for respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and Mr. Ingole, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶10

2] Petitioner has been allotted plot C-44, admeasuring about 2013 square meters. Mr. Lakhotia submits that a nallah is flowing through middle of plot and hence, that plot cannot be used by him for establishing Dal Mill. It is pointed out to us that, part of said plot is required to construct a nallah to divert the water and also for public road. Thus, after part of plot is used for these purposes, its area is reduced to 1419 square meters. Advocate Lakhotiya, in this situation states that if the petitioner is given alternate plot, petitioner is ready to take it even at present market value.

¶11

3] Advocate Dande is strongly opposing the contention. According to him, Nallah does not flow from center of the plot and even after provision for Nallah and road, rest of the plot can be conveniently used for construction of Dal Mill. He also states that if petitioner is not satisfied with that plot, he can apply to respondent Nos. 3,4 and 5 and the respondent Nos. 3,4 and 5 can evaluate his entitlement in accordance with law.

¶12

48 sr. no..odt

¶13

{2}

¶14

4] As the respondents appear to be willing to consider the grievance without observing anything on merits, we grant liberty to petitioner to make suitable representation. If such representation is made within 4 weeks, respondent Nos. 2,3 and 4 shall consider it independently, within further 4 weeks. Till the decision on proposal of petitioner is communicated to petitioner, the possession of petitioner on Plot No. C-44, shall not be disturbed.

¶15

5] With these directions and keeping all rival contentions open, we dispose of the petition. No costs.

¶16

[A.M. BADAR] [B.P. DHARMADHIKARI] JUDGE JUDGE.

¶17

grt/-

Akash Omprakash Somani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Omprakash Somani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Div. Nanded Vs Datta Ramrao Deshmukh and Ors.

Kamal Janardhan Munde Vs the Union of India and Others

Prasad Padmprabhu Zade and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

M/S. Y.Ramchandra Reddy Yeture Vs State of Maharashtra

Aba Bapu Dange Died Lrs Jalindar Vaijanath Dange and Others Vs Vishwanath Bhaurao Morale Died Lrs Bayasakhubai and Others

Pandurang Shankar Mahanor and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others