Quashed

Sapphire Bar and Restaurant v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC21 Sept 2018WP/2841/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the Municipal Corporation's order dated 20th August 2018, remanding the matter for a fresh reasoned order after the petitioner submitted relevant assessment chart documents before the order was passed. Merits were kept open.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 20th August 2018 quashed; matter remanded to Corporation for fresh reasoned order; merits kept open.

Sapphire Bar and Restaurant Vs Municipal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

901-wpl 3016-18

psv

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L.) NO.3016 OF 2018

¶5

Sapphire Bar And Restaurant ...Petitioner Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents

¶6

Mr.Amir Arsiwala with Mr.Akshay Mehta i/b. Ms.Mansi Patel for Petitioner. Ms.Sheetal Metakari for MCGM.

¶7

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, ACTING C.J. AND G.S. KULKARNI, J. DATE : 21^st SEPTEMBER 2018

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Municipal Corporation on 20^th August 2018. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that before the order was received, the petitioner had produced certain documents which are not taken into consideration.

¶10

2. The learned Counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that the Corporation needs to verify the contentions raised by the petitioner and at this stage, it would not be appropriate to make any statement.

¶11

¶12

901-wpl 3016-18

¶13

3. We have perused the record placed before us. We have considered the submissions advanced. The main document submitted by the petitioner is the Assessment Chart for the Property Tax.

¶14

4. Normally we do not interfere in the petitions on this ground, but in view of the statement made, that the main document was submitted before the impugned order was received by the petitioner, it would be appropriate to grant an opportunity to the petitioner, so that the petitioner is not prejudiced in any manner.

¶15

5. For the above reasons, the impugned order dated 20^th August 2018 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Corporation.

¶16

6. The designated officer of the Corporation would take into consideration the relevant documents submitted by the petitioner and a fresh reasoned order be passed, without being influenced by the order passed by this Court.

¶17

7. All contentions of the parties on merits of the case are kept

open.

901-wpl 3016-18

8. In case an order adverse to the petitioner is passed, the petitioner may resort to appropriate legal remedies.

¶22

9. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶23

G.S. KULKARNI, J. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Sapphire Bar and Restaurant v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sapphire Bar and Restaurant v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Amit Asit Shah Vs State of Maharashtra through Commissioner of Police, Pune and Ors.

Sahyog and Company Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Smt. Asha Suresh Upadhye Vs Shri Ranjitsingh Deol, the Commissioner and Anr.

Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Smt. Kesarben Khushalchand Nagda Vs the Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane and Ors.

Leela Vinay Pandey Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.