Allowed

Shri. Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre v. M/S. Adhiraj Builders and Developers Thru Its Prop. Brij Bhushan Gupta and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Jul 2022IA/1315/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for restoration of a public interest litigation was pending before the High Court of Bombay. The court set aside the dismissal order subject to payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the order dismissing the Public Interest Litigation, subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 20,000/- within one week.

What the court decided

Shri. Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre Vs M/S. Adhiraj… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶2

Digitally signed URMILA by URMILAPRAMOD PRAMOD INGALE INGALE Date:2022.07.08 18:55:19 +0530

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1315 OF 2019

¶5

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 47 OF 2019

¶7

¶8

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 93 OF 2016

¶9

Shri Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre .. Applicant In the matter between Shri Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre … Petitioner

¶10

vs.

¶11

M/s. Adhiraj Builders & Developers & ors. … Respondents

¶12

Mr. Idris M. Vohra i/b Mr. Vinod Shinde, for Applicant.

¶13

Mr. Sameer Pandit a/w Ms. Krina Gandhi i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., for Respondent No. 1.

¶14

CORAM : A. K. MENON , J. &

¶15

M.S. KARNIK , J.

¶16

DATED : 8th JULY, 2022

¶17

P.C. :

¶18

Interim Application No. 1315 of 2019

¶19

The interim application seeks restoration of civil application no. 47 of

¶20

2019 which in turn, seeks restoration of Public Interest Litigation.

¶21

The application is opposed on behalf of respondent no. 1.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

Perused the interim application as well as civil application no. 47 of

¶24

1/2

¶25

ia 1315.19.odt Urmila Ingale

¶26

In our view, considering the reasons provided and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to set aside the order of dismissal of Public Interest Litigation subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/- within a period of one week from today.

¶27

Accordingly, interim application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses

¶28

12.1.

¶29

If the costs is not paid, this order shall stand vacated. No further application for restoration shall be entertained.

¶30

Interim Application is disposed of.

¶31

Civil Application No. 47 of 2019

¶32

This is an application for restoration of Public Interest Litigation.

¶33

For the reasons stated in the application, application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses 9.1.

¶34

Civil Application is disposed of.

¶35

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶36

(A. K. MENON, J.)

¶37

2/2

¶38

ia 1315.19.odt Urmila Ingale

Shri. Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre v. M/S. Adhiraj Builders and Developers Thru Its Prop. Brij Bhushan Gupta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Shri. Bhiva Kashinath Mhatre v. M/S. Adhiraj Builders and Developers Thru Its Prop. Brij Bhushan Gupta and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indian Insti. of Architects, Navi Mumbai Center, Thru Chair. Shekhar Bagool and Jt. Sec. Kaushal Ja Vs the City and Industrial Developement Corp. Ltd. and Ors.

Nagarjun Wadekar Vs the Union of India Thr. Secretary Ministry of Education (Hrd) and Ors.

Parsurambhai Lachhiyabhai Chaudhary and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Lalit Suresh Mahajan Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Mr. Murlidhar Janardhan Gharat Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.