Dismissed
Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra v. Municipal Commissioner and 4 Ors.
Bombay HCPIL/55/2014
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Urmila Ingale IN THE HIGH COURT
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 55 OF 2014
Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra .. Petitioner
Vs.
Municipal Commissioner Brihanmumbai Mahangar Palika and ors. .. Respondents
Ms.Nisha Mehra, for the Petitioner.
Dr.Birendra Saraf a/w Mr.Saura Subha Ghosh and Mr.Rahul Hingmiya i/b Hariani & Co., for Respondent No.6. Ms.Neha Dhuru i/b Mulla & Mulla and Craigie Blunt for Respondent No.4(a).
Ms.Trupti Puranik for Respondents No. 1 to 3 – BMC.
CORAM : SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR &
M.S.KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 06th JUNE, 2016
P.C. :
. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner pleads 'no
instructions'. According to the learned Counsel for the
respondent, in regard to the same building, respondent No.
1/2
6 has filed a civil Suit bearing No. 2681 of 2011 before the City Civil Court, Mumbai and in the said Suit, there is injunction against further action by the Municipal Corporation. Be that as it may, since the learned Counsel for the petitioner is pleading 'no instructions', we dismiss this Petition for want of prosecution.
( M.S.KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR, J.)
2/2
Nityanand Harnarayan Mishra
Municipal Commissioner Brihanmumbai Mahanagar Palika
Shantanu S. Kemkar
M.S. Karnik
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court