Adarsh Chawl Committee vs Hubtown Limited — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Adarsh Chawl Committee vs Hubtown Limited — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt petition not carried forward and stands disposed of in terms of the Court's observations; all cheques to be handed over to the advocate for the petitioner during the course of the day under a covering letter; contentions on quantum and on the 7 ineligible members expressly kept open, with the MIDC competent officer to decide on the ineligible members' documents within two weeks of submission; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether Respondent No. 1 committed contempt of the directions contained in paragraph 4 of the order dated 04 March 2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench on Writ Petition No. 938 of 2024. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court accepted the statement made by Mr. Kamat for respondent no. 1 that during the course of the day all cheques would be handed over to the advocate for the petitioner under a covering letter.

Ratio / Principle

The Court kept open all contentions of the petitioner on the quantum, which needs to be amicably resolved and/or with the intervention of the Competent Officer of the M.I.D.C.

Key takeaways

The Court decided not to carry forward the contempt petition, which would stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations.ratio¶18
It is clarified that the Court has not examined any other contentions.obiter¶19
The Court permitted the 7 ineligible members to furnish all appropriate documents to the competent officer of the MIDC, if the documents are so available.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Contempt Petition No. 29 of 2025 in Writ Petition No. 938 of 2024 — Adarsh Chawl Committee v. Hubtown Limited & Anr. (G. S. Kulkarni & Aarti Sathe, JJ., 10 November 2025). The contempt alleged was of the directions contained in paragraph 4 of the order dated 04 March 2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench on the writ petition. Respondent No. 1 stated that it had forwarded cheques to 51 eligible members, which were returned by the members disputing the quantum, and that all cheques were brought to the Court and could be handed over to the eligible members. The petitioner's members agreed to receive the cheques without prejudice to their rights and contentions to claim the deficit amount, if any. The Court kept open all contentions of the petitioner on the quantum, to be amicably resolved and/or with the intervention of the Competent Officer of the M.I.D.C.; accepted respondent no. 1's statement that all cheques would be handed over to the petitioner's advocate under a covering letter; and did not carry forward the contempt petition, which stands disposed of in terms of the observations. The Court clarified that it had not examined any other contentions. In respect of 7 ineligible members, they were permitted to furnish all appropriate documents, if available, to the competent officer of the MIDC, who shall take a decision thereon within two weeks from the date of submission; contentions in that regard expressly kept open. Disposed of; no costs.

20-CONPW 29-25 IN WP 938-24.DOC

PRAJAKTASAGAR Digitallysigned byPRAJAKTASAGARVARTAK VARTAK Date:2025.11.1117:24:19+0530 Prajakta Vartak

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 29 OF 2025 IN

WRIT PETITION NO. 938 OF 2024

Adarsh Chawl Committee ...Petitioner Vs Hubtown Limited & Anr. ...Respondents

Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh with Mr. Haamid Ahmed for Petitioner. Mr. Ashish Kamat, Senior Advocate with Ms. Simanthi Mohite for Respondent No.1.

Mr. Prashant Chawan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Meet Vora and Ms. Poonam Sheth i/b. M/s. Navdeep Vora & Associates for Respondent No.2/MIDC.

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 10 NOVEMBER 2025.

P.C.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties on this contempt petition. The contempt as alleged in this petition is of the directions as contained in paragraph 4 of the order dated 04 March 2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on the aforesaid writ petition.

Mr. Kamat, learned senior counsel for respondent no.1 has pointed out that the case of the petitioner on contempt is not correct as his client had forwarded the cheques to 51 eligible members, however, the same were returned by them disputing the quantum of the said amount. On instructions, Mr. Kamat has stated that even today all the cheques, which were sought to be issued in favour of the eligible members, are brought to the Court and the same can be handed over to the said eligible members.

Considering the stand taken on behalf of respondent no.1, Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the said members of the

Page 1 of 2 10 November 2025

20-CONPW 29-25 IN WP 938-24.DOC

petitioner will receive the cheques without prejudice to their rights and contentions to claim the deficit amount, if any.

In this view of the matter, we keep open all contentions of the petitioner on the quantum which needs to be amicably resolved and/or with the intervention of the Competent Officer of the M.I.D.C.

We accordingly accept the statement as made by Mr. Kamat that during the course of the day, all cheques would be handed over to the advocate for the petitioner under a covering letter. We accordingly do not carry forward the contempt petition which would stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations.

It is clarified that we have not examined any other contentions.

Insofar as 7 ineligible members are concerned, we permit the said members to furnish all appropriate documents to the competent officer of the MIDC, if the documents are so available. The competent officer shall take a decision on the said documents placed before him/her within a period of two weeks from the date of submission of such documents. All contentions of the petitioner in that regard are expressly kept open.

Disposed of. No costs.

(AARTI SATHE, J.)

(G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

Page 2 of 2 10 November 2025