Dismissed

Gopal Pamnani v. State of Maharashtra, through Dept of Industries and Ors.

Bombay HC5 Feb 2015WP/8181/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the title of a leased industrial plot and the lease agreement. The bench declined to entertain the petition, ruling that the title dispute falls within the exclusive domain of a Civil Court and the Petitioner did not appear in MIDC records.

What did the court decide?

Petition rejected; writ jurisdiction declined in favor of Civil Court for resolving the title dispute.

Gopal Pamnani Vs State of Maharashtra, through Dept of… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

wp-8181.12

¶3

ash

¶4

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8181 OF 2012

¶6

Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders.

¶7

Shri S.S. Pakale i/by Shri Avinash R. Belge for the Petitioner. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent No.1.

¶8

Shri Prashant P. Chavan along with Shri Navdeep Vora and Shri Meet Vora i/by M/s. Navdeep Vora & Associates for the Respondent Nos.2 to 6. Shri Vijay B. Dhingreja for Respondent No.8.

¶9

Shri Devendranath S. Joshi for Respondent No.9.

¶10

Shri Amol Kumeria for the Intervenor.

¶11

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.K.MENON, JJ DATED : 5TH FEBRUARY 2015

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

. Heard learned counsel appearing for the

¶14

Petitioner and the learned counsel representing the Respondents.

¶15

There is a serious dispute as to the title of the plot in question. Even going by the case made out by the Petitioner that the lease was executed by the

¶16

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation in

¶17

 2wp-8181.12

¶18

ash

¶19

the name of a partnership firm, the entire Petition proceeds on the footing that the Petitioner is a Lessee on the plot in question and a factory constructed thereon. There is a serious dispute about the title claimed by the Petitioner. The name of the Petitioner does not appear in the records of the MIDC as an Allottee or the Lessee of the plot in question. The issue of title can be resolved only by a Competent Civil Court. Hence, we decline to entertain this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶20

Subject to what is observed above, we reject the Petition.

Gopal Pamnani v. State of Maharashtra, through Dept of Industries and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Pamnani v. State of Maharashtra, through Dept of Industries and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sou Mathurabai Bhausaheb Thorat Sevabhavi Trust Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept. and Ors.

M/S. Colour Tech Coating (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and Ors.

Smt. Sundar Madhav Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept. and Ors.

Arvind Ganesh Paranjape (Since Decd) Thorugh Lrs. and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

M/S. Gangamai Industries and Constructions Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/S. Hindustan Breweries and Bottling Ltd. Vs the Commissioner State Excise and Ors.