Disposed

The Chembur Gymkhana through Its Executive Secretary Mr. Vijay Padlekar v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Bombay HC6 Feb 2015FA/122/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

No legal issues were framed. The appeal and civil application were disposed of as withdrawn pursuant to a consent agreement where the appellants agreed to submit a regularization proposal to the authorized officer.

What did the court decide?

The First Appeal No.122 of 2015 and Civil Application No.307 of 2015 were disposed of as withdrawn.

The Chembur Gymkhana through Its Executive… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

918 fa122-15.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

FIRST APPEAL NO.122 OF 2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.307 OF 2015 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.122 OF 2015

¶4

The Chembur Gymkhana .. Appellant

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai .. Respondent

¶7

Mr.P.S.Bhosale a/w Mr.Sharad K. Bhosale for the applicant

¶8

Mr.Vinod Mahadik for the BMC

¶9

CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. DATED : 06/02/2015

¶10

PC :

¶11

1 Heard Shri Pramod Bhosle, learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the respondents at length.

¶12

2 Admit.

¶13

3 The learned counsel for the respondents waives service.

¶14

4 By consent of the parties, the Appeal is taken up for final

1/3

Mohite

918 fa122-15.doc

disposal.

5 The Appeal is disposed of in the following terms:

¶20

(a) Shri Bhosale, learned counsel for the appellants, on the basis of instructions received from Shri Shyam Agarwal, Secretary of the appellant states that during six weeks from today the appellants will submit proposal for regularization of the offending structure through licensed Architects to the Executive Engineer, Building Proposal, Eastern Suburbs, Vikhroli, Mumbai.

¶21

(b) The Executive Engineer, Building Proposal, Eastern Suburbs, Vikhroli, Mumbai shall accept the proposal and in case he finds any deficiency the same shall be communicated to the appellants in writing within two weeks thereafter.

¶22

(c) The proposal shall be considered within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said proposal in accordance with law and in case there is any deficiency, the period taken for removing the deficiency shall be excluded while computing the period of eight weeks.

¶23

(d) In case any adverse order is passed against the appellants, the said order shall not be implemented for a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the said

2/3

Mohite

918 fa122-15.doc

communication.

(e) During the above period and eight weeks thereafter the respondents shall not take any action against the offending structure.

¶29

4 In view of the above, the appellants seek permission to withdraw the First Appeal No.122 of 2015. Same is allowed.

¶30

5 In view thereof, the suit stands withdrawn as also the present First Appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn. Consequently, Civil Application No.307 of 2015 does not survive and the same is disposed of.

¶31

6 Appellant to place on record application in trial court that Suit is withdrawn by them.

¶32

(K.K.TATED, J.)

¶33

3/3

¶34

Mohite

The Chembur Gymkhana through Its Executive Secretary Mr. Vijay Padlekar v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chembur Gymkhana through Its Executive Secretary Mr. Vijay Padlekar v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

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 Ramesh Kumar Wadhwa Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

M/S Apul Textiles Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mrs. Kavita Sapan Das

Shri. Ramji Sakharam Rao Vs Fatima Abdullah Jendi and Ors.

Smt. Priyali Dattatraya @ Rajendra Jagtap and Ors. Vs Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Naushad Jalili Vs B S Raghvendra Bhatt and Ors.

Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Khalid Ahmed Ansari Vs Maharashtra Housing Area Development Authority (Mhada)