Dismissed

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan v. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC10 Jul 2019WP/1872/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Petition (L) No. 1622 of 2019, the Bombay High Court accepted the petitioner's undertaking to hand over property possession for road widening by September 16, 2019, with compensation to be determined within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to hand over vacant and peaceful possession by September 16, 2019, subject to settlement of compensation within 3 months.

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan Vs the Municipal Corporation… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

913-OSWP1622-19.DOC

¶2

Shephali

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1622 OF 2019

¶4

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan...Petitioner
Versus
Mumbai Municipal Corporation of Greater ...Respondents
Mumbai & Anr

¶5

Mr Amrut Joshi, with Kunal Chheda, for the Petitioner.
Mr Bhavanji Lalan, Petitioner, is present.
Mr Sachin Gite, with Vandana Mahadik, for the MCGM.
Mr Chetan Shirudkar, Junior Engineer (Maintenance) K/W Ward,
MCGM, is present.

¶6

CORAM: S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & G.S. PATEL, JJ DATED: 10th July 2019

¶7

PC:-

¶8

1. After the writ petition was argued for some time, on previous occasions and today, the Municipal Corporation placed before us a measurement report and compliance statement.

¶9

2.On perusing the same, we asked the Counsel appearing for
the petitioner in his presence as to whether the petitioner is ready
and willing to hand over the property belonging to him to the
Municipal Corporation for widening of the road.

¶10

Page 1 of 3
10th July 2019

¶11

913-OSWP1622-19.DOC

¶12

3. After the Counsel spoke to the petitioner, the petitioner says that he would hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the property, meaning thereby the structure and the land beneath on or before the 16th September 2019.

¶13

4.On the possession being handed over, the Municipal
Corporation to then determine the compensation payable to the
petitioner for such an act of the petitioner and disburse that amount
as expeditiously as possible and within a period of three months
from the date of handing over the possession.

¶14

5.We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion either on
the manner in which the compensation would be determined or its
quantum.

¶15

6. All contentions in that regard are kept open.

¶16

7.Needless, therefore, to clarify that it would be for the
petitioner to accept the amount offered under protest and without
prejudice to his rights and contentions.

¶17

8. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶18

9.The statement made by the petitioner and recorded above is
accepted as an undertaking to this court. On its non-compliance, all

¶19

Page 2 of 3
10th July 2019

¶20

913-OSWP1622-19.DOC

¶21

consequences in law shall follow including forcible dispossession
and action in contempt.

¶22

(G. S. PATEL, J)

¶23

(S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J)

¶24

Page 3 of 3
10th July 2019

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan v. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavanji Shamji Lalan v. the 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri.Ismail Mohsin Sham Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and 12 Ors.

Taraben Harekchand Shah Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Satish Kaur Sahni Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 5 Ors.

Sarthak Developers and Anr. Vs Priyadarshini Chsl

Sarthak Developers and Anr. Vs Priyadarshini Chsl

Sarthak Developers and Anr. Vs Priyadarshini Chsl