Disposed

M/S.Vighnaharta Builders and Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburb) and 8 Ors.

Bombay HC8 Jul 2016WP/1660/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a civil suit. The interim protection granted on 21/04/2016 was continued for six weeks to enable the filing of the civil suit, while a deposit request was declined.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file a civil suit; interim order continued for six weeks; prayer to deposit Rs. 22 Crores declined.

M/S.Vighnaharta Builders and Projects Pvt… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

wpl 740.16 doc

¶2

Urmila Ingale

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 740 OF 2016

¶6

M/s.Vighnaharta Builders and Projects Pvt.Ltd.

¶7

.. Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburb) and ors. .. Respondents

¶10

Mr.Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Shushrut Desai, Mr.Anil Jariyal a/w Mr.P.G.Lad a/w Ms.Sayli Apte i/b Ms.Aparna Murlidharan Kalathil, for the Petitioner.

¶11

Mr.S.U.Kamdar, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Chirag Balsara, Mr.S.B.Pawar, Ms.Swati Sawant and Ms.Nikita Jacob i/b M/s.S.K.Legal Associates, for Respondent No.4.

¶12

Mr.A.Y.Sakhare, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Joel Carlos and Ms.Shobha Ajitkumar, for Respondents No.1 to 3 - BMC.

¶13

Ms.Geeta Shastri, Additional Government Pleader for Respondent No.5 - State.

¶14

CORAM : SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR &

¶15

M.S.KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 08^th JULY, 2016

¶16

P.C. :

¶17

. Heard the parties through their Counsel.

¶18

We have heard the matter at length. After arguing

¶19

the Petition at length, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner,

¶20

1/3

¶21

wpl 740.16 doc

¶22

on instructions, has stated that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the action of the respondents No. 1 to 3 – Corporation before the Civil Court by filing a Civil Suit. He, however, makes a prayer that till the petitioner files a Suit and applies for temporary injunction, interim protection granted by this Court on 21/04/2016 be continued. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 3 - Corporation submits that the interim protection may be granted only for a limited period so that there may not be any further delay in the project. He also submits that the petitioner may be directed to deposit Rs. 22 Crores and odd.

¶23

Having considered the prayer made by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and submissions made by learned Senior Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 – Corporation, we allow the petitioner to withdraw this Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a Civil Suit challenging the action of the respondents No. 1 to 3. We also continue the interim order dated 21/04/2016 for a period of 6

¶24

2/3

¶25

wpl 740.16 doc

¶26

weeks from today enabling the petitioner to file Civil Suit and to pray for interim relief. However, we decline the prayer made by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents No. 1 to 3 – Corporation to direct the petitioner to deposit Rs. 22 Crores and odd as assessed by them in the impugned communication which according to the petitioner is a disputed amount. Needless to say that we have not expressed our opinion about the merits of the matter and the Civil Court will be free to decide the matter on its own merits in accordance with law and shall not be influenced by the interim protection granted by this Court or any observations made in this order. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn.

¶27

( M.S.KARNIK, J.) (SHANTANU.S.KEMKAR, J.)

¶28

3/3

M/S.Vighnaharta Builders and Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburb) and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Vighnaharta Builders and Projects Pvt. Ltd. v. the Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburb) and 8 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

Vasant Ganesh Dabke Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Public Works Dept and Ors.

Hamid Dawood Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Mandanlal Pukhraj Jain and 3 Ors. Vs the Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Smt. Punam Tanaji Dhangar Vs Tha Additional Commissioner, Pune Division and Ors.

Shri. Vilas Shamrao Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Milind Kundalik Pokale Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.