The Bombay High Court upheld a preliminary objection raised by the Municipal Corporation, holding that the matter is better challenged under section 217 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to file appropriate proceedings.
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.
903.WP2457_2014.doc
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION No. 2457 OF 2014
Savitaben Harshadrai Desai … Petitioner vs. The Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai & Anr. … Respondents
Mr. Tanvir Shaikh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Vandana Mahadik, Advocate for respondent no. 1/BMC. Mr. Vijay Patil, Advocate for respondent no. 2.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & C.V. BHADANG, JJ. DATE : 29th January, 2015.
P.C.
Heard.
Ms. Mahadik, the learned counsel for the Corporation raises a preliminary objection to the tenability of the Writ Petition. It is stated that the petitioner can challenge the tax bills under section 217 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. It is stated that several disputed questions of facts are involved in this Writ Petition.
We uphold the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the Corporation and decline to entertain the Writ Petition. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to file an appropriate proceedings.
1 of 2
903.WP2457_2014.doc
The Writ Petition is disposed of, with no order as to costs.
The points raised in the Writ Petition are kept open.
(C.V. BHADANG, J.)
(VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should entertain the writ petition challenging the tax bills.
Savitaben Harshadrai Desai
The Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai
Vasanti A. Naik
C.V. Bhadang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
