Dismissed

Nice Shelter and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors. and Vikram Gokhale (Applicant)

Bombay HC14 Feb 2018CHSW/33/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed chamber summons No. 33 of 2018 filed by Vikram Gokhale seeking intervention in Writ Petition No. 438 of 2011. The Court held the applicant was not a proper or necessary party to the ongoing litigation concerning land reservation under the MRTP Act.

What did the court decide?

Chamber summons No. 33 of 2018 for intervention is dismissed.

Nice Shelter and Anr. Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

7 chsw 33.18.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 33 OF 2018 IN

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 438 OF 2011

¶4

Shri Vikram Gokhale	…..Applicant
In the matter of
M/s. Nice Shelters and anr.	…...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and ors.	…....Respondents

¶5

Mr. R. S. Apte, senior advocate with Ms. Veena Bhagwat, advocate for the applicant.

¶6

Mr. Jennifer Michael along with Ms. Riddhi Rana i/b. Mr. Dhiren H. Shah, advocate for the petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Sagar Patil, advocate for the MCGM.

¶8

CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ.

¶9

DATE : 14^th FEBRUARY, 2018.

¶10

P. C. :

¶11

The chamber summons is taken out by the applicant for

¶12

intervention in the aforesaid petition.

¶13

The writ petition is filed seeking declaration that the reservation for “garden” in the subject plot has lapsed by virtue of provisions of Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short “the MRTP Act”). The question involved in this petition is whether steps to acquire the land is taken by the

¶14

Shubhada S Kadam 1/2

¶15

7 chsw 33.18.doc

¶16

Corporation within the statutory period stipulated under Section 127 of the MRTP Act. The petition is already admitted and ready for final hearing.

¶17

The present applicant is the representative of the residents/citizens/social organizations of Vile Parle. The intervention is sought on the ground that the subject plot is reserved for garden for the benefit and enjoyment of the residents. Since limited issue raised in the petition is about lapsing under Section 127 of the MRTP Act, the present applicant is neither proper nor necessary party. Be that as it may, earlier Kshitij Prathisthan, NGO, had filed chamber summons No.33 of 2013 for intervention in the above petition. The intervention was sought on the ground similar to the one raised in the present chamber summons. The said chamber summons was dismissed by Division Bench of this Court on 15^th April, 2013.

¶18

In the light of the above, we are not inclined to entertain

¶19

the present chamber summons and the, same is accordingly dismissed.

¶20

[SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

¶21

Shubhada S Kadam 2/2

Nice Shelter and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors. and Vikram Gokhale (Applicant)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nice Shelter and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors. and Vikram Gokhale (Applicant)

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

Pandurang Kisan Nhavi (Pande) and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary and Ors.

Vasant Rambharati Gosavi and Ors. Vs Smt. Janakibai Maruti Londhe

Shri. Pandurang Tukaram Amate and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vasant Govind Kalokhe Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Parshura Ganpati Chavan Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Malan Chandrakant Bhande and Ors. Vs the Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.