Disposed

Harbell Hotels Private Limited v. Zubaida Begum W/O. Late Nawab Mir Zulfekhar Jah Bahadu Thru Poa Md. Javed Md. Hanif Shaikh and or

Bombay HC6 Dec 2019WP/12050/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition arising from a review application under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code was disposed of. The court directed the respondent revenue authority to decide the pending review application within six weeks and stayed the impugned order during the interim.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.7 directed to decide the review application within 6 weeks and not act upon the impugned order until then.

Harbell Hotels Private Limited Vs Zubaida… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

WP12050_19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.12050 OF 2019

¶4

Harbell Hotels Private Limited … Petitioner Vs.

¶5

Zubaida Begum w/o. Late Nawab Mir Zulfekhar Jah Bahadu thru POA Md. Javed Md. and others … Respondents

¶6

Mr. A. Y. Sakhare, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Shyamsundar Solanke i/b. PNP and Associates for Petitioner.

¶7

Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w. Ms Sayali Pari and Mr. Vikas Kumbhar i/ b. P. V. Nichani & Co. for Respondent No.1. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader a/w. Mr. S. L. Babar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3, 6 and 7-State.

¶8

CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN, J. DATE : DECEMBER 06, 2019

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard Mr. Sakhare, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner; Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud, learned counsel for respondent No.1; and Mr. S. L. Babar, learned AGP for respondent Nos.2, 3, 6 and 7-State.

¶11

Considering the controversy in question and the order that is proposed to be passed, issuance of formal notice is considered not necessary as the case is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶12

Without entering into the rival contentions what is noticeable is that petitioner has filed a review application under Section 258 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 before respondent No.7 for review of order dated 17.07.2019 passed in Revision Application No.RTS-3517/C.No.54/J5 A filed by respondent No.1.

¶13

The review application was received in the office of respondent No.7 on 21.09.2019. However, because of various reasons, the review application has not been heard.

¶14

1/2

¶15

WP12050_19.doc

¶16

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on due consideration, Court is of the view that respondent No.7 should take on Board the above review application filed by the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously and in accordance with law.

¶17

5.1. Let respondent No.7 hear and decide the review application on its own merit within a period of 6 weeks from today. During the interregnum, order dated 17.07.2019 passed by respondent No.7 in revision shall not be acted upon.

¶18

5.2. No opinion is expressed on merit.

¶19

Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶20

(UJJAL BHUYAN, J.)

¶21

Minal Parab

¶22

2/2

Harbell Hotels Private Limited v. Zubaida Begum W/O. Late Nawab Mir Zulfekhar Jah Bahadu Thru Poa Md. Javed Md. Hanif Shaikh and or

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harbell Hotels Private Limited v. Zubaida Begum W/O. Late Nawab Mir Zulfekhar Jah Bahadu Thru Poa Md. Javed Md. Hanif Shaikh and or

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

Swami Vivekanand Nagari Sahakri Pat Sanstha Maryadit and Ors. Vs Ramesh Shankar Wani and Ors.

Ramesh Shankar Wani Vs Swami Vivekanand Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit and Ors.

Smt. Nasim Turabddin Mushrif Vs Shams Education Society, Miraj through President and Ors.

Dwarka Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs M/S. Mulraj Khatau and Sons Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Harbell Hotels Private Limited Vs Zubaida Begum W/O. Late Nawab Mir Zulfekhar Jah Bahadu Thru Poa Md. Javed Md. Hanif Shaikh and or

Sandra Dsouza and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.