Dynasty Agro Constro LLP vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Dynasty Agro Constro LLP vs Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of, the substantive prayer being worked out in view of the Respondent-Corporation's affidavit dated 23.02.2025 (no encroachments on the 20/30/40 mtrs. D.P. Road alignments; additional access road at village Muhammad Wadi) and the accepted statement of no encroachments.

Issue for consideration

Whether there are encroachments on the said D.P. road in the alignment of 20 mtrs., 30 mtrs. and 40 mtrs., as claimed by the Petitioner. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court accepted the statement of Mr. Sakhare, learned Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3, on instructions, that as of today there are no encroachments on the said D.P. road in the alignment of 20 mtrs., 30 mtrs. and 40 mtrs.

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded the affidavit's denial of the Petitioner's allegation of a single accessible 24 mtrs. D.P. Road, with the specific averment that there is one more access road to the Petitioner's project at village Muhammad Wadi, and treated the substantive prayer as worked out in view of the affidavit and the accepted statement.

Key takeaways

In view of the affidavit and the accepted statement, the substantive prayer in the Petition is worked out; nothing further survives in the Petition, which is accordingly disposed of.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (A. S. Gadkari & Kamal Khata, JJ.), Writ Petition No. 14463 of 2024, decided 24 February 2025 — Dynasty Agr Constro LLP v. The Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr.: Petition disposed of. Pursuant to Order dated 29.01.2025, Shri Prithviraj B. P., Additional Commissioner of the Respondent-Corporation, affirmed an Affidavit dated 23.02.2025 (para 18) stating that there are no encroachments in the alignment of the 20, 30 and 40 mtrs. D.P. Roads, and that, as per MSETCL letter dated 03.06.2024 (Ex. B), the Corporation was constrained to barricade the bridge/18m DP road at Dorabji Naala. The affidavit further denied the Petitioner's allegation that, per the sanctioned plan, its project has only one accessible 24 mtrs. D.P. Road, with the specific averment of one more access road at village Muhammad Wadi. The Court accepted the statement of learned Senior Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3, on instructions, that no encroachments exist on the said D.P. road; held the substantive prayer worked out; nothing further survived; petition disposed of.

sns 4-aswp-14463-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.14463 of 2024

Dynasty Agr Constro LLP … Petitioner.

V/s.

The Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. … Respondents.

Ms. Minal Chandnani for the Petitioner.

Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate i/by Adv. Vishwanath Patil, Adv. Akshay Naidu, Adv. Kedar Nhavkar for Respondent Nos.1 & 3. Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP, for the Respondent-State.

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 24^th February 2025.

P.C.:-

In furtherance of Order dated 29^th January, 2025, Shri.

Prithviraj B. P., Additional Commissioner of Respondent-Corporation has affirmed an Affidavit dated 23^rd February, 2025. Mr. Sakhare, learned Senior

Advocate for the Respondent-Corporation tendered across the bar the said

Affidavit

1.1) Paragraph No.18 of the said Affidavit reads as under:

“18) I say that there are no encroachments in the alignment

SUMEDH NAMDEO SONAWANE

of 20 mtrs, 30 mtrs and 40 mtrs D.P. Road under the said

Digitally signed by SUMEDH NAMDEO SONAWANE Date: 2025.02.28 14:41:50 +0530

1/2

sns 4-aswp-14463-2024.doc

village. Hence, the claim made by the Petitioner is false and

not true. I say that due to the circumstances mentioned above

and as per the letter dated 03.06.2024 (EX.B), issued by

MSETCL, the Respondent Corporation was constrained to

barricade the bridge/18m DP road at Dorabji Naala.”

Mr. Sakhare learned Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 3 on instructions further submitted that, as of today there are no encroachments on the said D.P. road, in the alignment of 20 mtrs., 30 mtrs. and 40 mtrs. The said statement is accepted.

In the said Affidavit the concerned Authority has further affirmed that, the allegation of the Petitioner that as per the sanctioned plan there is only one accessible road of 24 mtrs. D.P. Road to its project is denied with a specific averment that, there is one more access road to the Petitioner’s project at village Muhammad Wadi.

In view of the above, the substantive prayer in the Petition is worked out. Nothing further survives in the Petition and is accordingly disposed off.

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

2/2