Quashed

Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Anr.

Bombay HC1 Oct 2014WP/3017/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a short order where the High Court of Bombay Writ Bench declined to entertain a writ petition because the petitioner had filed 12 pending Municipal Appeals under Section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; ad-interim relief extended by four weeks pending disposal of municipal appeals.

Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2014)

wp3017

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3017 OF 2014

¶5

Tower Vision India Pvt.Ltd.
vs.
State of Maharashtra

¶6

...Respondent

¶7

Ms Sweta Nijhawan i/b Mr.H.S.Venegavkar for the
petitioner

¶8

Mr.Rajesh Behere for the respondent No.2

¶9

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 G.S.KULKARNI, JJ.
 DATE : OCTOBER 1,2014

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1On the last date, a statement was made by the
learned counsel for the second respondent on
instructions that the petitioner has preferred 12
separate Municipal Appeals under section 406 of the
Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act,1949 before

¶12

the Small Causes Court,Pune, and the said appeals
are pending. Today, the learned counsel for the
second respondent has placed on record a print out
of the case status on the website of the District
Court which shows that 12 appeals preferred by the
petitioner are pending. The learned counsel for the
petitioner states that she has not received any
instructions as regards the said statement made on
the last date.

¶13

2In view of the fact that 12 Municipal Appeals
preferred by the petitioner are pending as stated by

¶14

2 wp3017

¶15

the learned counsel for the second respondent, we
decline to entertain this petition.

¶16

3Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to
the petitioner to prosecute the Municipal appeals.
To enable the petitioner to take appropriate steps,
ad-interim relief granted in the Writ Petition is
extended by a period of four weeks from today.

Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Anil Appasaheb Desai Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Shamrao Jinappa Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Anil Vinayakrao Chavan and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Krishnath Ashok Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Balgonda Jangonda Patil Vs Union of India, Thorugh Dept of Petroleum, Navi Delhi and Ors.

Federation of Maharashtra Kerosene Dealers Association Vs State of Maharahstra and Anr.