Dismissed¶21

Salvodor Michel Dias and Anr. v. Elijabeth Anthony Dias and Anr.

Bombay HC6 May 2025WP/3467/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Writ Petition No. 3467 of 2025, decided 10 July 2025 by Gauri Godse, J. Plaintiffs' petition against trial court order rejecting chamber summons to add corporation as defendant in a suit over a flat in defendant no.2 society dismissed; corporation held neither proper nor necessary party; no perversity or illegality in impugned order; Article 227 jurisdiction declined; liberty granted to seek mediation via trial court. Statute referenced: Article 227, Constitution of India. No precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to make a request before the trial court for considering grant of an opportunity to the parties to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement through mediation ¶21

Salvodor Michel Dias and Anr. vs Elijabeth Anthony… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

Digitally signed VARSHA by VARSHAVIJAY VIJAY RAJGURU RAJGURU Date:2025.07.11 18:38:24 +0530

¶2

39-wp-3467-2025.doc

¶3

varsha

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3467 OF 2025

¶5

Salvodor Michel Dias and Anr … Petitioners

¶6

vs.

¶7

Elijabeth Anthony Dias and Anr … Respondents

¶8

Mr. Harshal Mirashi for Petitioners.

¶9

Ms. Leena Patil for Respondent No.1.

¶10

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 10^th JULY 2025

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

This petition is filed by the plaintiffs to challenge the chamber summons refusing to add the corporation as a party defendant to the suit. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the erstwhile owner of the land where the flat is situated was belonging to the corporation. Hence, the corporation would be a necessary party.

¶13

Learned judge has rejected the application by considering the pleadings and the prayers in the suit. The allegations in the suit and the prayers pertain to the private dispute with regard to the flat in defendant no.2 society. Hence, considering the prayers which are for the injunction against the defendants from disturbing

¶14

the plaintiffs’ possession and dispossessing him without following

¶15

Page no. 1 of 2

¶16

39-wp-3467-2025.doc

¶17

due process of law, the corporation would not be concerned with the suit. Hence, the learned judge is right in observing that the corporation is neither a proper nor necessary party in the suit for adjudication of the petitioners’ claim.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since this is a family dispute, the petitioners would be agreeable to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement through mediation. Learned counsel for respondent submits that she is appointed through Legal Aid; hence, it would be appropriate if this request is made in the trial court for considering grant of an opportunity to the parties to explore possibility of an amicable settlement.

¶19

The petitioner is at liberty to make a request before the trial court for considering grant of an opportunity to the parties to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement through mediation.

¶20

I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. There is no reason to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the impugned order.

¶21

Writ Petition is therefore dismissed, with the liberty as recorded above.

¶22

(GAURI GODSE, J.)

¶23

Page no. 2 of 2

Salvodor Michel Dias and Anr. v. Elijabeth Anthony Dias and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salvodor Michel Dias and Anr. v. Elijabeth Anthony Dias and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jyotiprabha Prabhakar Patil vs Union of India through the Original Side Department

Prakash Vitthal Kadam vs Vasant Vitthal Kadam and Ors.

M/S. Pathak and Associates on Behalf Mrs Vinaya Abhay Pathak vs Shri. Ravindra Vishnu Savadikar

Shri. Pratap @ Ravindra Narhari Bhange vs Kamal Narhari Bhange and Ors.

Mahadev Gopal Rhatwal vs 1. Shankar Ravaji Patane(Deceased)

Monica Nana vs Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika and Others