A single paragraph order disposing of Writ Petition No. 2538 of 2015 based on consent minutes. The court directed implementation of a prior order and removed one respondent, noting their absence.
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.
wp2538-15.doc
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2538 OF 2015
M/s. Lakdawala Developers Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner
vs
The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority & Ors.
...Respondents
Mr. Karan Bhosale, i/b. Mr. O.A. Siddiqui & Mr. Rajendra Rathod, for the Petitioner.
Ms. S.U. Deshmukh, for MHADA/Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
Ms. K.H. Mastakar, for Respondent No.4-BMC.
Mr. Arshad Shaikh, i/b. Mr. Sunil Pandey, for Respondent Nos. 7 to 44.
CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.
DATED: JULY 18, 2016
P.C. :
. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Learned Counsel tender minutes of order signed by the Advocates of the Petitioner and on behalf of Advocate for Respondent Nos.7 to 44. Learned Counsel for MHADA - Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as well as learned Counsel for the 4th Respondent Municipal Corporation have not signed the minutes. Anyway, the contest really is between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 to 44. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 are individual tenants, who were represented by an Advocate earlier but are not appearing today. The other tenants and occupants, who are arraigned as Respondent Nos. 7 to 44 are represented by an Advocate, who supports the consent minutes of
Pg 1 of 2
wp2538-15.doc
order. In the light of this and considering the fact that the minutes of order tendered by Counsel for the Petitioner and Respondent No. 7 to 44 merely proceed on the basis of an order already passed by this Court on 9 February 2015, which is sought to be implemented in terms of the minutes proposed, this petition is disposed of in terms of minutes, which are taken on record marked “X” for identification. No order as to costs.
( S.C. GUPTE, J. )
Pg 2 of 2
M/s. Lakdawala Developers Pvt. Ltd.
The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority
Respondent Nos. 1 to 3
Municipal Corporation (BMC)
Respondent Nos. 5 to 44
S.C. GUPTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
