Allowed

Sunil Babani H.U.F. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 53 Ors.

Bombay HC30 Jan 2015WP/3093/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of Writ Petition No. 3093 of 2014 by accepting consent terms tendered by the parties. The court accepted the terms as just and reasonable, upheld the associated undertakings, and ordered no costs.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of the writ petition on the consent terms dated 30th January 2015; undertakings accepted; no order as to costs.

Sunil Babani H.U.F. Vs Municipal Corporation of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

YBG

¶2

1 wp3093-14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3093 OF 2014

¶5

Sunil Babani HUF .. Petitioner - Versus - Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents

¶6

Mr.Chirag Mody i/b. Ashok Purohit & Co. for petitioner Ms.Shobha Ajitkumar for respondent No.1 BMC Mr.N.N.Bhadrashete for respondent Nos. 2 to 42 Mr.Sunil Gangan i/b. RMG Law Associates for respondent No.43 Mr.Prashant Kulkarni for respondent No.44 to 52 and 55

¶7

CORAM : SMT. V.A.NAIK & C.V.BHADANG, JJ. DATE : 30th January 2015.

¶8

P.C.

¶9

The learned Counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to

¶10

delete the names of the respondent Nos.53 and 54 from the array of

¶11

parties. So also the petitioners seek leave to add Mr.Ramgopal Mundra and Mrs.Snehaprabha Mundra as respondent Nos. 55 to

¶12

this petition. Leave granted. Amendments be carried out forthwith.

(C.V.BHADANG, J)

(SMT.V.A.NAIK, J)

YBG

wp3093-14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶19

WRIT PETITION NO.3093 OF 2014

¶20

Sunil Babani HUF

¶21

.. Petitioner

¶22

Versus -

¶23

Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents

¶24

¶25

CORAM : SMT. V.A.NAIK & C.V.BHADANG, JJ. DATE : 30th January 2015.

¶26

P.C.

¶27

The learned Counsel for the parties have tendered the consent terms signed by the parties in the court today. The same are accepted on record.

¶28

It is informed to this court by the learned Counsel for the

YBG

wp3093-14

parties that the consent terms are signed by the petitioner and the counsel for the petitioner and the respondent Nos. 2 to 55 and the Counsel for the same. It is also informed that the petitioner Mr.Sunil Babani, Karta of HUF is present in the court. So also the Chairman, Secretary and Treasurer of the respondent No.2 society are present. The respondent Nos. 3 to 55 are also present in the court today barring respondent Nos. 26, 28, 37 and 40. It is stated by the Counsel for the absent respondents that the respondent No.26 is undergoing chemotherapy, the respondent No.28 has fractured his leg, the respondent No.37 has a paralytic attack and the respondent No.40 has undergone a by-pass operation just recently. It is however stated by the Counsel for the absent respondents that these respondents have signed the consent terms in the presence of their Counsel.

¶33

We have perused the consent terms. The consent terms appear to be just and reasonable.

¶34

Hence, this petition is disposed of on the consent terms dated 30th January 2015. Undertakings contained in consent terms are

YBG

wp3093-14

accepted as undertakings to this Court. There would be no order as

¶39

to costs.

¶40

(C.V.BHADANG, J) ( SMT. V.A.NAIK, J.)

Sunil Babani H.U.F. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 53 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Babani H.U.F. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 53 Ors.

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 Amiruddin Azizpasha Jagirdar and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sharad Ganpat Gaikwad Vs M/S. Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Education Society

Elson Joseph Fernandis and 50 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shirish R. Kale Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors.

Mrs.Rashmi Mahesh Tawade Vs the Clare Road Jesus and Mery Society and 4 Ors.

M/S. Manav Builders Private Limited Vs Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board and 5 Ors. and Raees Ahmed Shaikh (Applicant/Inter