Disposed

Mr. Zainullah Shah Mohd. Chaudhary v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai

Bombay HC6 Dec 2016AO/244/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal against a draft Notice of Motion order refusing ad-interim reliefs was disposed of. The High Court allowed the inter protection granted by the Trial Court to continue until the Notice of Motion is finally heard. The Civil Application was also disposed of under the same terms.

What did the court decide?

The protection granted by the Trial Court by an order dated 15.1.2015 continues to operate till the Notice of Motion is heard and decided. The Appeal and the Civil Application are disposed of.

Mr. Zainullah Shah Mohd. Chaudhary Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

912-AO-244-15+.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 244 OF 2015

¶4

WITH

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2015 IN

¶6

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 244 OF 2015

¶7

Mr. Zainullah Shah Mohd. Chaudhary Versus

¶8

…Appellant

¶9

The Municipal Corporation of Greater …Respondent Mumbai

¶10

Mr. P.J. Thorat, for the Appellant.

¶11

Ms. Madhuri More, for the Respondent.

¶12

CORAM : G.S. KULKARNI, J. DATE : 6th December 2016

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Heard Mr. Thorat, the learned Counsel for the Appellant

¶15

and Ms. More, the learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation.

¶16

This Appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15th January 2015 passed by the learned Trial Judge in draft Notice

¶17

Sharayu . 1 / 3

¶18

912-AO-244-15+.doc

¶19

of Motion in L.C. Suit No. 43 of 2015. By the impugned order, the learned Trial Judge has refused to grant ad-interim reliefs in the draft Notice of Motion. This Appeal was heard on 24th February 2015 by this Court and while adjourning the hearing of this Appeal, an interim protection which was granted by the Trial Court on 15th January 2015, was permitted to be continued. The parties are ad idem that the said protection continues till date.

¶20

Mr. Thorat, the learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Notice of Motion itself is listed before the learned Trial Judge on 10th January 2017 for final hearing. If that be the case and as this Appeal arises from an ad-interim order it would be appropriate that the said Notice of Motion itself is heard and decided. No purpose would be served to keep this Appeal pending.

¶21

In the meantime, till the Notice of Motion is heard and decided, the protection which is granted by the learned Trial Court by an order dated 15th January 2015 and continued by this Court on 24th February 2015 and by subsequent orders, shall continue to operate.

¶22

The Appeal from Order is accordingly disposed of in above terms. No costs. All contentions of the parties on merits of the

¶23

Sharayu . 2 / 3

¶24

912-AO-244-15+.doc

¶25

matter are expressly kept open.

¶26

Civil Application would also not survive and is

¶27

accordingly, disposed of.

¶28

[G.S. KULKARNI, J.]

¶29

Sharayu .

¶30

3 / 3

Mr. Zainullah Shah Mohd. Chaudhary v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Zainullah Shah Mohd. Chaudhary v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Fatimabi Habib Sayyed Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay

Smt. Fatimabi Habib Sayyed Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay

Mrs Roda Hemant Kara and Anr. Vs Mahendra Jamnadas Kara and Anr.

Mrs. Shahina Parveen Mohammed W/O. Aamri Khan Vs Hanjar Nagar No. 6, Co-Operative Housing Soc. Ltd.

Mrs. Shahina Parveen Mohammed W/O. Aamri Khan Vs Hanjar Nagar No. 6, Co-Operative Housing Soc. Ltd.

Mr. Sandip Baban Taware Vs Mr. Baban Taware and Anr.