Allowed¶21

Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal v. the Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and 9 Ors.

Bombay HC9 Apr 2025IA/958/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Procedural order, Bombay High Court OOCJ, 9 April 2025: further four-week extension (last chance) to remove office objections in Writ Petition (L) No. 16706 of 2023; conditional on Rs. 5,000/- cost to High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai within two weeks of upload; undertaking accepted; automatic dismissal without restoration on failure; Petitioner Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal; Respondents include Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai (BMC) and State.

What did the court decide?

Four weeks' further time, as a last chance, to remove office objections, subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- cost to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai within two weeks of upload of the order; failing which the Petition stands dismissed without further reference and without restoration. ¶21

Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal vs the Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and 9 Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner should be granted a further extension of time to remove office objections in Writ Petition (L) No. 16706 of 2023, and on what conditions.

¶21

Court's answer

The statement of the Petitioner's Advocate offering to pay a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai, within two weeks of upload of the order, was accepted as an undertaking given to the Court.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Subject to payment of the said cost within the stipulated period, the period to remove office objections was extended by four weeks from the date of the order, as a last chance.

¶21

Key takeaways

If the office objections are not removed within the extended period, the Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court and will not be restored again on any ground.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (A. S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata, JJ.), order dated 9 April 2025 in Interim Application No. 958 of 2025 in Writ Petition (L) No. 16706 of 2023 (Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal v. Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Ors.): Despite an earlier extension granted on 4 February 2025, a further extension to remove office objections was sought with pleas the Court termed specious. On the Petitioner's Advocate stating that the Petitioner would pay a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai within two weeks of upload of the order, the Court accepted the statement as an undertaking and, subject to such payment, extended the period to remove office objections by four weeks as a last chance. It was made clear that if the office objections were not removed within the extended period, the Petition would stand dismissed without further reference to the Court and would not be restored again on any ground.

¶1

dtg 5-Ia-958-2025.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 958 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 16706 OF 2023

¶5

Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal … Applicant/Petitioner V/s.

¶6

The Municipal Corporation Of Gr. Mumbai & Ors. … Respondents

¶7

Mr. J. P. Kharge for Applicant/Petitioner.

¶8

Ms. Meena Dhuri a/w Ms. Kejali Mastakar i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 – BMC.

¶9

Mr. Himanshu Takke, A.G.P. for Respondent No.6-State.

¶10

Mr. Rajan Yadav i/b Mr. Kiran Jain & Co. for Respondent Nos. 7 to 10.

¶11

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 9^th April 2025.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Despite granting extension to remove office objections on 4^th

¶14

February 2025, again an extension is sought with some specious pleas. However, on the statement made by the learned Advocate for the Applicant/Petitioner that, for extension of further time to remove office objections, the Petitioner will pay a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to the High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai, within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading of the present Order on the official website of the

¶15

High Court of Bombay. The said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court.

¶16

1/2

¶17

dtg 5-Ia-958-2025.doc

¶18

2.1) Details of the bank account for payment of cost are as under :-

¶19

Account Name	: The High Court Employees Medical Welfare Fund at Mumbai
Bank and Branch	: Bank of India, Mumbai (Main) Branch
Account Number	: 000120110001337
IFSC Code	: BKID0000001

¶20

Subject to payment of aforesaid cost within stipulated period as

¶21

noted above to the said welfare fund, period to remove office objections is extended by four weeks from today, as a last chance.

¶22

1. It is made clear that, if the office objections are not removed in

¶23

this extended period, the Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to this Court and will not be restored again on any ground.

¶24

( KAMAL KHATA, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )

¶25

2/2

Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal v. the Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mery Emelia Anthony Muttungal v. the Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Satish Umesh Prabhu vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Mumbai Maratha Dnyatichya Fal Vyaparyancha Dharmaday Trust vs the Brihanumumbai Mahanagarpalika

Ramji Wagha Dabhi Alias Kathewadi and 4 Others vs Bharati Bhima Dabhi W/O Bhima Wagha Dabhi Alias Kathewadi

New Samrat Welfare Society vs Muncipil Corporaton of Greater Mumbai

Satish Umesh Prabhu vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Taufiqua Habib Ansari vs Dudhwala Real Estate and Investment through Its Partners