Date: 17-01-2018
Business: Adv. Ms. Manali /survey For Plaintiff present.
Adv. Mr. Khandagale for defendant no.1/ BMC present.
Matter adjd to 06/02/2018 service affidavit of contempt motion / compliance by Plaintiff / final arguments.
Next Purpose: AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
Next Hearing Date: 06-02-2018
Date: 06-02-2018
Business: Representative of Plaintiff present.
Adv. Khandagale for BMC/Deft. present.
Plaintiff files original contempt N/M no.58/18, TOR.
Adv. for defendant seeks adjournment for filing reply. Granted as last chance.
Matter adjd to 27/02/2018 N/M reply and final argument.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 27-02-2018
Date: 27-02-2018
Business: As court is busy in dictating judgment. Hence board is discharged.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 24-04-2018
Date: 24-04-2018
Business: Advocate Mr. Saket Chavan h/f Sachin Kadam for the plaintiff present.
Advocate Mr. Khandagle for BMC/deft present.
Matter adjd to 19.06.2018 for passing no reply order to contempt N/M/ final arguments.
Next Purpose: ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 19-06-2018
Date: 19-06-2018
Business: Adv Manali Surve h/f adv Sachin Kadam for the plaintiff present.
Adv Khandagale for the def/BMC present.
Last chances granted to def/BMC to file reply.
Adjourned to 21.07.2018 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2018
Date: 21-07-2018
Business: Adv Saket Chavan h/f adv Sachin Kadam for plaintiff present.
Adv Khandagale for def/BMC present.
KB
LO at 4.10 pm
Adv Saket Chavan h/f adv Sachin Kadam for plaintiff present.
Adv Khandagale for def/BMC present.
At the request of adv for def/BMC matter adjourned to 04.09.2018 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 04-09-2018
Date: 04-09-2018
Business: Court is vacant. Hence today board is discharged.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2018
Date: 11-10-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 27-11-2018
Date: 27-11-2018
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 29-01-2019
Date: 29-01-2019
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 21-02-2019
Date: 21-02-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Ankit Sawant h/f Adv. Sachin Kadam for Plaintiff present and submitted that, matter may be adjourned to short date as advocate Mr. Sachin Kadam is held up in another Court. This suit is pending suit pending since 2009 hence adjmt. sought can not be granted, infact advocates for Mumbai, they are always busy in another court, it does not mean that this matter should be delayed however, for giving fair opportunity to Plaintiff, Plaintiff is directed to file written notes of arguments, so that on next date Plaintiff will not be required to seek adjmt on the ground of busy schedule of his advocate.
Advocate Mr. Sinha for BMC/Deft present.
Case is adjourned to 06/03/2019 for Arguments. Defendant is also directed to file written notes of arguments, if possible. Both parties will be given opportunity to make oral submissions in reply to their arguments.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 06-03-2019
Date: 06-03-2019
Business: Adv Ms. Manali Surve h/f Adv. Kadam for Plaintiff present.
Advocate Mr. Dhiren Sinha for BMC/Deft present.
K.B. L.O.
Defendant\''s advocate file reply to contempt NM, r.o.r.
Plaintiff\''s advocate filed pursis Exh. 26 contending that plaintiff is not intending to adduce any oral evidence in support of contempt motion.
Defendant\''s advocate also filed pursis Exh.27 contending that defendant is not intending to adduce oral evidence in support of reply to contempt Nm.
Plaintiffs advocate submitted that on next date she will file written notes of arguments in respect of Suit as well as contempt Nm. Plaintiff is directed to serve copy of written notes of arguments on defendant\''s advocate so that defendant\''s advocate will be able to argue to matter. By consent matter is adjourned.
Case is adjourned to 25.03.2019 for arguments.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 25-03-2019
Date: 25-03-2019
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
Advocate Mr. Some Sinha for BMC/Deft present.
K.B.
L.O. at 11.35 a.m.
Advocate Ms. Manali Surve for Plaintiff present and filed written notes of arguments Exh.28 and written notes of arguments on contempt NM Exh.29 t.o.r. Copies served upon Defendant\''s advocate.
Advocate Mr. Some Sinha for BMC/Deft submitted that, he is going to reply the argument by way of oral arguments. It is argued that Plaintiff has filed L. C. Suit no.3587/2007 in which notices Exh.G and I annexed to the plaint were challenged. While referring copy of order dated 16/01/2009 (page no.51 Exh.K of plaint) passed by the Court in suit no.3587/2007 it is argued that in said suit it was submitted by Plaintiff\''s advocate that there was chance of regularization and the application filed by Plaintiff for regularization was rejected as it was not in proper form and as it was not filed through architect. It is submitted that, admittedly, regularization application filed by Plaintiff is rejected hence, Plaintiff was having remedy u/s 47 of MRTP Act and Plaintiff was expected to challenge regularization rejection order before competent authority appointed by Government. It is further argued that in the order passed by the Court in Suit no.3587/2007 the Court has directed Plaintiff to approach the authority concerned through some architect for regularization of structure within a month from the date of said order. It is pointed out that Court has dismissed suit no.3587/2007 and thereafter Plaintiff has not moved any regularization application with BMC. In para no.19 of plaint it is alleged by Plaintiff that Plaintiff through her architect approached BMC for filing regularization proposal after dismissal of suit no.3587/2007 but BMC has not accepted said proposal. It is argued that no documentary evidence is filed to support said allegations to show that regularization proposal was submitted and only the letter issued by Plaintiff\''s architect is filed on record however, any architect may write such letters to favour his clients. According to Defendant\''s advocate as ordered by the Court in suit no.3587/2007 BMC could not have dared to not accept regularization proposal, if any filed by Plaintiff. It is argued that after dismissal of suit no.3587/2007 Plaintiff has filed this suit for challenging same notices and therefore Plaintiffs claim is not maintainable. Letter dated 20/03/2009 sent by Plaintiff\''s architect Mr. Prabhakar Satam (page no.54, Exh.L of plaint) was not addressed to Plaintiff but it was addressed to Jagdish Singh G. Purohit and others, therefore Plaintiff can not have benefit of said letter also. Copy of property card filed by Plaintiff with list Exh.12 is not helpful to Plaintiff because Plaintiff has pleaded that there is dispute about entries in P.R. card. It is pointed out that copies Shop Establishment certificates filed with plaint and list of documents Exh.12 are different. Electricity bill filed at Exh.15 shows that suit property was standing in the name of Mira Rajput Kuwar Dapubai. However it is Plaintiff\''s case that they have purchases suit property from Defendant no.2. As such, electricity bill Exh.2 is not helpful to the Plaintiff. It is submitted that, with reply to disputed notice Plaintiff has filed the documents like establishment certificate, electricity bill, P.R. card and disputed agreement however none of those documents prove authorization of notice structure. As Plaintiff was not having documents to prove authorization of notice structure, Plaintiff has not filed regularization proposal as directed by the Court and again on the basis of same documents Plaintiff has filed this suit, hence, Plaintiff\''s claim is not maintainable at all. While referring written notes of arguments filed by Plaintiff it is pointed out that in para 3 of those notes it is submitted that personal hearing was given to Plaintiff in respect of notice u/s 351 of BMC Act which was issued in the month of May 2007. Thereafter, as submitted in Exh.28, speaking order dated 14/09/2007 was passed and it was informed to Plaintiff that the documents filed by Plaintiff do not prove the existence of notice structure since prior to 1962 or it does not prove authorization of notice structure. Lastly, it is submitted that by filing this suit Plaintiff has made fraud upon the Court hence suit is liable to be dismissed with cost.
In respect of contempt Notice of Motion Defendant\''s advocate submitted that, no contempt is committed by BMC because suit property was not even touched as alleged by Plaintiff. It is argued that shop no.4 situated near suit property was demolished as it was unoccupied, however shop no.3 was kept intact and photographs to that effect are taken on record.
Learned advocate for Plaintiff submitted that, her written notes of arguments Exh.28 may be considered as reply to Defendants argument. As such, arguments completed.
Case is adjourned to 30/03/2019 for Judgment.
Next Purpose: JUDGMENT
Next Hearing Date: 30-03-2019
Date: 30-03-2019
Business: Adv. Kadam for plaintiff present
Advocate Ms.Smita Chavan on b/h of Adv. Mrs. Mhatre for BMC/Deft present.
Court is busy in dictating judgment of suit no.6630/2006
Case is adjourned to 10/04/2019 for judgment.
Reason For Adjournment: court time is over
Next Purpose: JUDGMENT
Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2019
Date: 10-04-2019
Business: Adv. Manali Surve h/f adv. Sachin Kadam for Plaintiff present
Advocate Som Sinha a/w Adv. Chavan for BMC/Deft present.
Written notes of arguments are already filed by plaintiff. Heard Adv. Sinha for defendant BMC.
None for defendant no.2.
Case is adjourned to 18.04.2019 for Judgment.
Next Purpose: JUDGMENT
Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2019
Date: 18-04-2019
Business: Advocate Sachin Kadam for plaintiff present.
Counsel Som Sinha for MCGM/Deft. present
Exh. -Judgment
FRSR following order is passed
ORDER
Suit is dismissed with costs.
The parties are at liberty to argue on Notice of Motion on 07.06.2019.
The case is adjourned to 07.06.2019 for NM arguments.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 07-06-2019
Date: 07-06-2019
Business: Advocate Manali Surve for plaintiff present.
Advocate Mr. Giri for defendant/MCGM present and sought time. Time is granted.
The case is adjourned to 06.07.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2019
Date: 06-07-2019
Business: As Court is busy in hearing NM in Suit no. 1127/17 to 1130/17 and in hearing urgent ad-interim matter in ST 6905/19 also in passing order in suit no. 1306/19 and Suit no. 1472/10. The board is discharged.
The case is adjourned to 18.07.2019 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 18-07-2019
Date: 18-07-2019
Business: Advocate Ms. Manali Surve for plaintiff present.
Advocate Som Sinha BMC Counsel present.
The case is adjourned to 14.08.2019 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 14-08-2019
Date: 14-08-2019
Business: None for plaintiff.
Advocate Giri for defendant/MCGM present and sought time. Time is granted.
The case is adjourned to 17.09.2019 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 17-09-2019
Date: 17-09-2019
Business: As Court is busy in hearing Chamber Summons in suit no. 1571/15, 1572/15, 5099/12, 6493/03 and 2363/19 and in hearing ad interim in ST no. 9928/19 also in dictating orders in Suit no. 1571/15, 1572/15, 6493/03. The case is adjourned.
The case is adjourned to 10.10.2019 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2019
Date: 10-10-2019
Business: Advocate Desai for plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Mhatre for defendant/MCGM present.
The case is adjourned to 19.12.2019 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2019
Date: 19-12-2019
Business: None for plaintiff, hence adjourned.
Adv. Mhatre for deft./MCGM, prayed adjournment to file reply.
Matter is adjd. to 13.02.2020 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2020
Date: 13-02-2020
Business: None for Plaintiff.
Adv. Mrs. Mhatre for deft./MCGM, prayed for time to file reply.
Matter is adjd.for NM reply on 20.03.2020.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2020
Date: 20-03-2020
Business: None for plaintiff present.
Adv. Mrs. Mhatre for deft./MCGM, prayed for adjd to file reply.
Matter is adjd. for NM reply on 26.06.2020.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 26-06-2020
Date: 26-06-2020
Business: Due to Covid -19
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 29-08-2020
Date: 29-08-2020
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 26-10-2020
Date: 26-10-2020
Business: Matter is adjd to
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 12-01-2021
Date: 12-01-2021
Business: Adv. Som Sinha for plff. present.
Adv. Tondwalkar h/f Mhatre for deft./MCGM present.
Matter is adjd. to 22.02.2021 for NM reply.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2021
Date: 22-02-2021
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 16-04-2021
Date: 16-04-2021
Date: 03-07-2021
Reason For Adjournment: Adjourned due to Covid-19
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 28-08-2021
Date: 28-08-2021
Business: Court is Vacant. Matter adj. to next date
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 25-10-2021
Date: 25-10-2021
Business: Court is Vacant. Matter adj. to next date.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 01-12-2021
Date: 01-12-2021
Business: None present for Plaintiff.
Adv. Mr. Soham Sinha for Defendant/BMC present.
Matter adj. to 07/01/2022 for NM Hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2022
Date: 07-01-2022
Business: None present for plaintiff.
Adv. Mr. Khandagale for defendant/MCGM is present.
Adjourned for N.M. hearing to 18/02/2022.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 18-02-2022
Date: 18-02-2022
Business: None for the plaintiff is present.
Adv. Mr. Khandagale for defendant/MCGM is present.
Adjourned for NM hearing to 11.04.2022.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 11-04-2022
Date: 11-04-2022
Business: adjd to
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 29-07-2022
Date: 29-07-2022
Business: None present for the plaintiff.
Adv. Mr. Somsinha for defendant/MCGM is present.
KB LO at 03:41 pm.
Advocate for defendant filed written submission along-with copy of roznama and judgment. TOR. It is marked at Exh.31. O- Filed.
Adjourned for NM order to 12.08.2022.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 12-08-2022
Date: 12-08-2022
Business: None present for plaintiff.
Adv. Mr. Khandagale for defendant/MCGM is present.
The Court is busy hearing on NM No. 1745/2019 and ad-interim hearing in SU Nos. 1803/22 and 1796/2022.
Adjourned for NM Order to 03.09.2022.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 03-09-2022
Date: 03-09-2022
Business: Holiday declared due to Ganpati Festival
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 20-09-2022
Date: 20-09-2022
Business: Even today, the plaintiff is absent to proceed with his contempt NM No. 58/2018. The record shows that since long she is absent from the matter. It is, thus, clear that she is not interested to prosecute this NM. In the result, it is posted for dismissal Order.
Adv. J.V. Mhatre for defendant/MCGM is present.
Adjourned for NM dismissal Order to 27.09.2022.
Next Purpose: NM FOR DISMISSAL
Next Hearing Date: 27-09-2022
Date: 27-09-2022
Business: None present for the plaintiff.
Adv. Somsinha for defendant/MCGM is present.
The Court is busy recording evidence in SU Nos. 3965/2010, 1958/2014 and 1873/2014.
Adjourned for NM Order to 07.10.2022.
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 07-10-2022
Date: 07-10-2022
Business: None present for the plaintiff.
Adv. Khandagale h/f Adv. Somsinha for defendant/MCGM is present.
F.R.S.R. following order is passed on NM No. 58/2018 :
ORDER
(i). Notice of Motion No. 58/2018 stands dismissed.
(ii). Notice of Motion No. 58/2018 is, accordingly, disposed
of.
The proceeding stands closed.
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED
Disposal Date: 07-10-2022