Petitioner challenged an order directing eviction for failing to prove pre-1995 existence of premises. Court accepted corporation counsel's assurance to reconsider documents submitted within 10 days, disposing of the petition.
Writ petition disposed of; petitioner permitted to submit documents within 10 days for fresh consideration.
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.
bsb 1
WPL173.15.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 173 OF 2015
Kantilal Mokar Gosrani … Petitioner v/s
The Municipal Corpn. Of Gr. Mumbai & ors. … Respondents
Mr.Gautam Kanchanpurkar for the petitioner. Ms.Shobha Ajitkumar for respondent Corporation.
CORAM: SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & SHRI C. V. BHADANG, JJ.
DATED : 28 JANUARY 2015
P.C.:
Heard.
By this writ petition, the petitioner impugns the order of the Assistant Commissioner, 'S' Department, dated 22 May 2013, directing the petitioner to immediately vacate the premises and deliver the possession of the same to the 'S' Department of the Corporation as the petitioner has failed to prove that the concerned premises was in existence prior to 1st January 1995.
It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner had received the impugned order just recently. It is stated that the petitioner had hurriedly supplied only two documents to the Corporation to prove that the structure in question was in existence on 1st January 1995. It is stated that there are several documents
WPL173.15.doc
bsb 2
in the possession of the petitioner to show the existence of the structure before 1st January 1995 and the petitioner has annexed the same to this writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent Corporation to re-decide the claim of the petitioner by considering the various documents that are annexed to the petition and that could be supplied by the petitioner to the concerned department of the Corporation.
Ms.Ajitkumar, the learned counsel for the Corporation, on instructions from the officer of the Corporation, who is present in Court, states that if the petitioner submits the necessary documents to the 'S' Department of the Corporation within a period of 10 days, the Corporation would consider the same and decide the claim afresh within a period of one month.
In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Corporation the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed. We dispose of the writ petition by accepting the statement made on behalf of the Corporation as the same would be binding on it. The petitioner is permitted to submit the necessary documents along with an application within a period of 10 days.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the grievance of the petitioner regarding the impugned eviction order stands redressed by offering to consider additional documents.
Kantilal Mokar Gosrani
The Municipal Corpn. Of Gr. Mumbai
Vasanti A. Naik
C. V. Bhadang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
