Disposed

Reena Jayant Rajak ( Nee Reena Ranu Biswas) v. the Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors.

Bombay HC21 Apr 2023WP/4078/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted directions to the Respondent No.2 to issue notices, inquire about the possession of the premises by respondents 4, 5, and Mr. Aditya Sanjay Biswas, and hold forcible possession if necessary, without deciding on merits. The petition was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Rs. Details: RAW OR PARIS: 2/2

What the court decided

Reena Jayant Rajak ( Nee Reena Ranu Biswas) Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors. — Bombay HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

903-WP-4078-2022.doc

¶2

1 / 2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Digitally PURTIPRASAD signed byPURTIPRASADPARAB CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PARAB Date:2023.04.24 17:18:12 +0530

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 4078 OF 2022

¶5

Reena Jayant Rajak (Nee Reena Ranu Biswas) ….Petitioner V/s. The Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors. …Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. P.V. Dhopatkar i/b Santosh Vhatkar & Associates for Petitioner. Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy) for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Ashokkumar Upadhyay for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Mr. A. I. Patel, Addl. G.P. a/w Ms. K.N. Solunke, AGP for State/Respondent No.6.

¶8

¶9

CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ.

¶10

DATED : 21^st APRIL 2023

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

Petitioner is basically seeking direction to Respondent No.2 though prayer clause says Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to dispose petitioner’s representations dated 2^nd November 2021 and 12^th July 2021. Mr. Aradwad (Reddy) states that by 30^th May 2023 these representations will be disposed in accordance with law. There is allegation in the petition that Respondent No.4 is in forcible possession of Flat No.902, 9^th Floor, Shri Swayambhu S.R.A. Co.op. Housing Society Limited at C.T.S. No.226, 226/1 to 97 situated at Mouje Kanheri, Chinchpada, Borivali (East), Mumbai – 400 066. Counsel for Respondent No.4 denies that Respondent No.4 is in possession and says one Mr.Aditya is in possession. Said Mr. Aditya is not a party to the petition.

¶13

Purti Parab

¶14

903-WP-4078-2022.doc

¶15

2 / 2

¶16

Respondent No.2 shall give notice to Respondent No.4, 5 and actual occupant said Mr. Aditya Sanjay Biswas and enquire whether the person occupying is legally entitled to occupy the premises. If not Respondent No.2 shall take forcible possession of the premises and keep it in its custody to be handed over to the person legally entitled to as legal heir of late Ranu Shailesh Biswas. Of course, Respondent No.2 will also enquire whether late Ranu Shailesh Biswas himself was entitled to the said flat.

¶17

We clarify that we have not made any observations on the merits of the matter.

¶18

3. Petition disposed.

¶19

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶20

Purti Parab

Reena Jayant Rajak ( Nee Reena Ranu Biswas) v. the Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Reena Jayant Rajak ( Nee Reena Ranu Biswas) v. the Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority 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

Shri Raju Kanhu Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Principal Secretary of Cooperative Society and Ors.

Pathan Parvex Khan Sultan Khan Vs State of Maharshtra Thr the Secretary Cooperation Dept and Ors.

Malad Vikas Pratisthan Thru President Vaibhav Bharadkar and Anr. Vs Sate of Maharashtra Thru the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Mah. and Ors.

Rushali Rajesh Sawant Vs the Special Recovery and Sales Officer and 8 Ors.

Rushali Rajesh Sawant Vs the Special Recovery and Sales Officer and 8 Ors.

Aniketa Amogh Sawant Vs Liquidator / Administrator, Shree Suvarna Sahakari Bank Ltd. and Ors.