Richard D'Souza and 3 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

¶1

WP.1754.2015 with

1

CHS.290.2015(31)

mnm

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

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 1754 OF 2015 WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 290 OF 2015

¶7

Richard D'Souza & Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents

¶8

Mr. Vishal Chandrakant Ghosalkar, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. Rajiv Mane, AGP for the Respondent No.1 State Mrs. Shobha Ajitkumar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2 Mr. L.H. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant in the Chamber Summons No. 290 of 2015. Mr. Ram M. Bhatia, Designated Officer H/E Ward present

¶9

CORAM : A.S.OKA, & C.V. BHADANG, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 05, 2016

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This petition involves disputed questions of fact as regards the structural status of the building. According to us, this question can be more appropriately be decided by a Civil Court.

¶12

Therefore, we propose to relegate the petitioner to remedy of a civil suit. We may clarify here that as the action sought to be challenged is under Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, the bar created by Section 515-A of the said Act will not apply to the present case. We, accordingly,

WP.1754.2015 with

2

CHS.290.2015(31)

dispose of the petition by granting liberty to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court. To enable the petitioners to do so, ad-interim relief, which was granted in this Petition shall continue for a period of three weeks from today subject to the same terms and conditions.

¶17

We make it clear that the prayer for grant of ad-interim or interim relief shall be considered by the Civil Court without being influenced by the continuance of the ad-interim order.

¶18

All contentions on merit are kept open.

¶19

The Chamber Summons No. 290 of 2015 does not survive and therefore, disposed of.

Richard D'Souza and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Richard D'Souza and 3 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 4 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

Vishnu Babaji Rane Vs Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Babu Kalappa Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others

Shaikh Mohd Shabbir Vs the State of Maharashtra and 14 Other

M/S Shashanti Consultant and Investment Co.Pt.Ltd. Vs the Mun.Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai

Cosmos Homes India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Municipal Corporatio of Greater Bumbai and 11 Ors.

Dalichand G Shah Vs the Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and 2 Ors.