Disposed

Kashinath Govind Sandvekar v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai Thr. Its Designated Officer F/South

Bombay HC27 Feb 2024AO/395/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals from orders concerning MCGM were disposed of by consent, directing the trial court to decide the pending suits within eight months. Interim protection was continued until suit disposal; counsel undertook to implead the landlord to two suits. The impugned order was vacated and all merits contentions left open.

What did the court decide?

Trial court directed to decide suits within eight months; interim protection continued till suit disposal; impugned order vacated.

Kashinath Govind Sandvekar Vs the Municipal Corporation… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2024.02.28 11:03:34 Chitra Sonawane. +0530 1 5-AP-416-2023.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Appeal from Order No.416 of 2023

¶4

a/w

¶5

Interim Application No.7725/2023

¶6

¶7

Appeal from Order No. 416/2023

¶8

Anant Vishnu Bidwadkar Vs.

¶9

Anant Vishnu Bidwadkar .… Appellant. Vs. MCGM .... Respondent. a/w Interim Application No.17391/2023 In

¶10

Appeal from Order No. 416/2023

¶11

Geeta Bharat Vedant ... Applicant.

¶12

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: Anant Vishnu Bidwadkar .… Appellant. Vs.

¶13

MCGM .... Respondent. a/w

¶14

Appeal from Order No.395/2023

¶15

a/w

¶16

Interim Application No.4708/2023

¶17

¶18

Appeal from Order No. 395/2023

¶19

Kashinath Govind Sandvekar .. Appellant.

¶20

Chitra Sonawane. 2 5-AP-416-2023.doc

Vs.

MCGM .. Respondents.

a/w

Interim Application No.17390/2023

¶25

¶26

Appeal from Order No. 395/2023

¶27

Geeta Bharat Vedant

¶28

... Applicant.

¶29

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: Kashinath Govind Sandvekar ... Appellant. Vs. MCGM ... Respondent.

¶30

a/w

¶31

Appeal from Order No.476/2023 a/w

¶32

Interim Application No.12901/2023 in Appeal from Order No.476/2023

¶33

... Amit Ashok Shetye Appellant. Vs. MCGM & Anr. ... Respondents.

¶34

a/w

¶35

Appeal from Order No.473/2023

¶36

a/w

¶37

Interim Application No.12898/2023

¶38

in Appeal from Order No.473/2023

¶39

Chitra Sonawane. 3 5-AP-416-2023.doc

¶40

... Kiran Mangal Salve Appellant. Vs. MCGM & Anr. ... Respondents.

¶41

Mr CK Tripathi, for appellants in AO 395/2023 & AO 416/2023. Ms Priti Sejal Shah for appellants in AO 473/23 and AO 476/23. Ms Smita V. Tondwalkar for respondent No.1/BMC.

¶42

Mr Deepan Dixit for respondent No.2 in AO 473/23 and AO 476/23.

¶43

Mr Siddhant Sonawane, I/C Asst.Engg (B & F) F/South ward present.

¶44

Coram : R. N. Laddha, J. Date : 27 February 2024.

¶45

P.C. :

¶46

After hearing the matter for some time, learned Counsel for the parties jointly submitted that these appeals can be disposed of by directing the learned trial court to decide the suits pending before it, in a time bound manner.

¶47

In view of this, the learned trial court is requested to expedite the suits and to decide the same within eight months from receipt of this order.

¶48

Interim protection granted earlier shall continue to operate till disposal of the suits.

¶49

Learned Counsel for the appellants in Appeal from Order No.395/2023 and Appeal from Order No.416 of 2023, on instructions, makes a statement that he will implead the landlord-

¶50

Chitra Sonawane. 4 5-AP-416-2023.doc

¶51

Geeta Bharat Vedant to the suits pending before the learned trial Court within two weeks from today.

¶52

In view of this the impugned order stands vacated.

¶53

It is made clear that this court has not examined the merits of the matter and all contentions of the parties are left open.

¶54

Given the above, the appeals stands disposed of. As a sequel, the pending applications are also disposed of.

Kashinath Govind Sandvekar v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai Thr. Its Designated Officer F/South

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kashinath Govind Sandvekar v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai Thr. Its Designated Officer F/South

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

Babulal Anraj Shah and Others Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Another

Keerti Roshanlal Dhiliwal Vs Babulal Anraj Shah and Others

Babulal Anraj Shah and Others Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Another

Mrs. Shubhangi P. Modak Daughter of Dr. Arvind Sitaram Gokhale Vs M/S. Bal Enterprises and Others

Shri Sadashiv Sakharam Gholap and Ors. Vs Shri Dyandeo Tukaram Gholap and Ors.

Sumati Yashwant Mathure Vs Vasant Narayan Karkhanis (Deceds by Lrs) pUSHPA Vasant Karkhanis and Ors.