Disposed

Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala and 18 Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Bombay HC29 Nov 2017WP/2928/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners claimed total lease assignee representation, but the court recorded that rights were not admitted and notices would be issued under the Public Premises Act. The court held that nothing survived the petition as the matter was disposed of as agreed between parties, without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as agreed by parties; no opinion expressed on merits; notice proceedings to continue under Public Premises Act.

Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala and 18 Ors. Vs Union of India and… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2017)

903-wpl 3077-17

psv

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

¶5

WRIT PETITION (L.) NO.3077 OF 2017

¶6

Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala & Ors. ..Petitioners Vs. Union of India & Anr. ..Respondents

¶7

Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar with Huzefa Nasikwala and Mr.Raman Misra i/b. Nasikwala Law Office for Petitioners. Mr.T.J. Pandian for Respondents.

¶8

CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶9

DATE : 29^th NOVEMBER 2017

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents are intending to issue notice as provided under Section 4(2)(b) read with Section 7 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 to the petitioner No.1 Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala who represents all the other petitioners i.e. the petitioner Nos.2 to 19.

¶12

The learned Counsel for the petitioners stated that the petitioner No.1 if served with the said notice, that will be treated as proper service of notice to all the petitioners who claim to be the legal heirs of the assignee of the lease and no individual notice will

¶13

¶14

903-wpl 3077-17

¶15

be required to be served on Petitioner Nos.2 to 19. We record this statement.

¶16

We further record that the averments made in the petition about the rights claimed by the petitioners are not admitted by the respondents and the notice will be issued only in view of the provisions contained in the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.

¶17

The learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the proceedings which have been initiated against the occupants of the building in question will be taken along with the proceedings which will be initiated by issuing notice to the petitioners.

¶18

Needless to say that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims of either of the parties.

¶19

All contentions of the parties are kept open to agitate before the appropriate forum.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid, in our considered view, nothing survives in this petition. The Writ Petition is disposed of as agreed.

¶21

[G.S. KULKARNI, J.]

¶22

[SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.]

Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala and 18 Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabbir Feroz Arsiwala and 18 Ors. v. Union of India and Anr.

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

Bhupen Tokarshi Gala Vs State of Maharashtra and 7 Others

Nana Sambhaji Jadhav Vs the Chief Executive Officer, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and Anr.

Mrs.Laxmi Ravindra Jakkani and 8 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

M/S Shakti Sra Co. Opeative Housing Society Ltd. and Anr. Vs Chief Executive Officer and the Secretary and 8 Others

Rambahadoor @ Rembahadoor Bake Bihari Pal and 4 Ors. Vs the Chief Executive Officer and 4 Ors.

Runwal Homes Private Limited and Anr. Vs Union of India through the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and 4 Ors.