Allowed

Samson Peter v. State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Housing

Bombay HC8 Feb 2024WP/2638/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Bombay High Court addressed the petitioners' grievance over the non-execution of a Recovery Warrant by the State officials, directing the authorities to act expeditiously within six weeks while keeping private respondents' contentions open.

What did the court decide?

An order directing Respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to take appropriate action to execute the Recovery Warrant within six weeks.

Samson Peter Vs State of Maharashtra through… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

PRASHANTVILASRANE Digitallysigned byPRASHANTVILAS RANEDate:2024.02.1416:26:56+0530

¶2

28WP2638-23.DOC

¶3

P. V. Rane

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 2638 OF 2023

¶7

Samson Peter & Anr. … Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Maharashtra & Ors. …Respondents

¶10

Mr. Anand Pande, for the Petitioners.

¶11

Smt. Jyoti Chavan, Addl. Govt. Pleader with Mr. S. B. Gore, AGP for the State.

¶12

Ms. Shivani Varade i/b. MDP & Partners, for Respondent No.4.

¶13

_______________________ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATED: 8 February 2024

¶14

P. C.:

¶15

The only substantive prayers as made in the petitions read thus:

¶16

a. A Writ of Mandamus or any other writ or order be issued against the Respondent No.2 and 3 directing the Respondent No.2 and 3 to execute the Recovery Warrant dated 29.06.2021 Ex.C pursuant to the order dated 06.07.2020 Ex.B passed by the tribunal in Complaint No.CC006000000100567 by attaching and selling the properties of Respondent No.4.

¶17

b. that the Respondent No.2 and 3 be directed to see to it that the petitioners are paid their just and due payment as per the order dated 06.07.2020 Ex.B issued by the RERA Tribunal.”

¶18

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that a recovery warrant has been

¶19

issued in the proceedings in pursuance of the order passed by MAHARERA on

¶20

Page 1 of 2 8 February 2024

¶21

28WP2638-23.DOC

¶22

6 July, 2020 against respondent No.4, however, no action has been taken by the concerned authority to execute the said warrant.

¶23

In the aforesaid circumstances, as this is the only contention of the petitioners, we direct respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to take appropriate action in respect of the Recovery Warrant dated 29 June, 2021 issued in pursuance of the order dated 6 July, 2020 passed by the MAHARERA Tribunal, as expeditiously as possible, and, in any case, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is presented before the concerned authority.

¶24

All contentions of the private respondents are expressly kept open.

¶25

Disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

¶26

(FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI , J.)

¶27

Page 2 of 2 8 February 2024

Samson Peter v. State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Housing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samson Peter v. State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Housing

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

Ashok Dhawan Vs Shaikh Basheed and Ors.

Amol Dilip Tavildar Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Hsg. Dept and Anr.

Mrs. Janaki Suresh Vs Union of India and Anr.

Kiran P Khair Vs the Chief General Manager, Consumer Education and Protection Dept. and Anr.

Vinod Kumar Pandey and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Pina Pankaj Shah and Anr. vs Matrix Merchandise Limited and Ors.