Date: 28-02-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for Plaintiff present
Advocate Ms. Tondwalkar for BMC/Deft filed reply to NM, t.o.r. She also filed list of documents Exh.2, t.o.r. Advocate for BMC served copy of reply of NM upon Plaintiff\''s advocate.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Case is adjourned to 02/03/2019 for NM rejoinder/hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 02-03-2019
Date: 02-03-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for Plaintiff present and submitted that, affidavit of rejoinder of Plaintiff is ready, but affirmation of said affidavit is remained to be affirmed as affirmation department has closed its work at 1.00 p.m. hence matter may be adjourned.
Advocate Ms. Hajare h/f Adv. Tondwalkar for BMC/Deft present.
Case is adjourned to 06/03/2019 for NM rejoinder/hearing.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 06-03-2019
Date: 06-03-2019
Business: Court is busy in dictating order on Notice of Motion in suit no.2563/2018 and court has to hear urgent matters, hence case is adjourned to 18/03/2019.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
J.E. of BMC Mr. Kolekar present.
Advocate for Plaintiff filed rejoinder of Plaintiff to reply filed by Defendant, t.o.r.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2019
Date: 18-03-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for Plaintiff present and submitted that, in the notice dated 29/12/2011 Defendant\''s officer has asked Plaintiff to submit documentary evidence showing that suit premises is existing since prior to 01/01/1995. It is pointed out that copy of said notice with Plaintiff is misplaced but its copy is filed by Defendant at page no.1 of list of documents Exh.2. It is further argued that in disputed order dated 31/12/2018 Defendant\''s officer has admitted that suit premises which is affected is existing since prior to 01/04/1995 however he has concluded that there is no documentary evidence to show that suit premises is existing since 01/04/1962. As such, it is argued that even though Plaintiff has filed documents in reply to notice of 2011 establishing existence of notice structure since prior to 1995 now officers of Defendant are asking Plaintiff to file documents showing its existence since prior to 01/04/1962. Thus, speaking order is contrary to the notice issued on 29/12/2011. Learned advocate for Plaintiff also referred G.R. dated 16/05/2018 issued by Government of Maharashtra and argued that as per said G.R. properties which were existing as on 01/01/2011 are protected even for any project. Hence, on the basis of case laws cited by him, NM is necessary to be made absolute.
Advocate Ms. Tondwalkar for BMC/Deft argued that BMC officers have passed speaking order relying upon the BMC circular dated 20/03/2017 and its copy will be filed before the Court on next date. It is submitted that, if required she will argue further.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Time is extended till next date to register NM.
Case is adjourned to 25/03/2019 for NM order
Next Purpose: NM ORDERS
Next Hearing Date: 25-03-2019
Date: 25-03-2019
Business: Advocate Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for Plaintiff present and filed registered Notice of Motion no.1270/19 with affidavit in support, t.o.r.
Advocate Ms. Tondwalkar for BMC/Deft present.
Sub Engineer, Mr. Sachin Sarvde, BMC present and submitted that, letter of 2011 was issued to Plaintiff however, in 2011 BMC circular of 2004 was applicable to suit property and in view of said 2004 circular the structures existing since 1962 can be protected. 2004 circular is amended in the year 2017 but criteria for protection is not changed, hence according to BMC officer Mr. Sachin Sarvde, documents sought by the letter of 2011 can not be accepted for protection of suit property.
Court has pointed out BMC officer that in the letter of 2011 documents of existence of suit property since 1995 were sought and accordingly Plaintiff has produced documents thereafter BMC can not changed its stand and can not ask Plaintiff to file documents showing existence of suit property since 1962. Court has also pointed out BMC officer that BMC will have to either rely upon the letter of 2011 which is the base of disputed notice or BMC will have to withdraw said letter and BMC will have to withdraw disputed notice, with liberty to issue fresh notice upon Plaintiff so that Plaintiff can have the fair opportunity to produce the documents as sought.
Ms. Tondwalkar for BMC submitted that, BMC will take appropriate steps in respect of observations of the Court. Considering submissions adjourned.
Case is adjourned to 10/04/2019 for NM hearing and steps by BMC.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2019
Date: 10-04-2019
Business: Advocate Devmani Shukla for Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Tondawalkar for BMC/Deft. present.
KB
LO at 4.00pm
Advocate Devmani Shukla for Plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Tondawalkar for BMC/Deft. present.
Mr. Sachin Sarvade Sub Engineer \''S\'' Ward Maintenance Department is present. He makes a statement that defendant MCGM will withdraw the notice given to the plaintiff and may issue fresh notice. The statement is accepted.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Case is adjourned to 30.04.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2019
Date: 30-04-2019
Business: As Court is busy in hearing N/M in ST no. 1864/19 and in hearing urgent ad-interim matter. The board is discharged.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
The Case is adjd. To 25.06.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 25-06-2019
Date: 25-06-2019
Business: Advocate Vijayprakash Yadav for Plaintiff present.
Adv. Sidharth Chandrashekhar BMC Counsel present.
Adv. for plaintiff sought time to bring on record certain subsequent events claiming that the impugned notice is withdrawn by the defendants. He seeks time. Time is granted.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
The case is adjourned to 15.07.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 15-07-2019
Date: 15-07-2019
Business: Advocate Devmani Shukla for the plaintiff present.
Advocate Ms. Chavan for defendant /MCGM present.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Matter adjd to 19.08.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2019
Date: 19-08-2019
Business: Advocate Devmani Shukla for plaintiff present.
Advocate Giri for defendant/MCGM present.
As Court is busy in dictating order in suit no. 169/09 and hearing NM in suit no. 282/16 and ad-interim hearing in ST no. 8899/19 and 8902/19 and other matters on board. The case is adjourned.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
The case is adjourned to 09.09.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2019
Date: 09-09-2019
Business: Advocate Devmani Shukla for plaintiff present and filed draft chamber summons along with affidavit in support. T.O.R. Leave is granted to register Chamber Summons.
Advocate Chandrashekhar for defendant/MCGM present.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
The case is adjourned to 07.10.2019 for NM hearing.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 07-10-2019
Date: 07-10-2019
Business: Advocate Ms. Dipti Kuber h/f adv. Devmani Shukla for plaintiff present and filed original Chamber Summons No.1686/19 along with affidavit in support of Chamber Summons. T.O.R.
Adv. Sidharth Chandrashekhar Counsel for BMC present and sought time to file reply to Chamber Summons.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
The case is adjourned to 28.11.2019 for Chamber Summons reply.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2019
Date: 28-11-2019
Business: Adv. Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for plaintiff present.
Adv. Siddharth Chandrashekhar for deft./MCGM present.
At the request of both side, suit be send for mediation, first sitting before mediator is fixed on 05.12.2019.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Matter is adjd. for Ch/s reply on 19.12.2019.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2019
Date: 19-12-2019
Business: Adv. Hemangi for plaintiff present.
Adv. Sidharth for deft./MCGM present.
Both side submit that mediation process is going on.
Earlier order to continue till next date.
Matter is adjd. 23.01.2020 for Ch/s reply.
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 23-01-2020
Date: 23-01-2020
Business: HHJ is on leave. Hence today board is discharged
Next Purpose: C/S REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 17-02-2020
Date: 17-02-2020
Business: Adv. Mr. Vijayprakash Yadav for plff., disputed terms mentioned before the mediator. Plff is not ready to accept said terms.
Adv. Mr. Siddharth Chandrashekhar for deft./MCGM present.
Earlier order, if any, to continue till next date.
Matter is adjd. for NM hearing on 28.02.2020 at
11.30a.m.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 28-02-2020
Date: 28-02-2020
Business: Adv. Mr. Vijay Prakash Yadav for plff. present.
Adv. Mr. Chandrashekhar for deft./MCGM present.
Heard arguments of both side on Ch/s. no. 1686/19.
F.R.S.R. following order is passed on ch/s. no. 1686/19.
ORDER
1.Ch/s no. 1686/19 is made absolute.
2. Plff is at liberty to carryout the amendment within a week from date of uploading the order.
3. Deft/MCGM is at liberty to file W.S.
4. Considering urgency mentioned by MCGM, parties to expedite the hearing.
Adv. Mr. Vijay Yadav for plff, submits that in view of requirement of MCGM , plff is ready to furnish indemnity bond and NOC.
Adv. Mr. Siddharth for MCGM, on instruction of MCGM officer Mr. Mayurkumar Bhamare, Asst. Engg. (Maint.)\''S\'' ward, submits that plff. to comply formalities, MCGM is ready to hand over allotment letter as per policy of MCGM.
Earlier order, if any, to continue till next date.
Matter is adjd. for NM hearing/ consent terms on
29.02.2020.
Next Purpose: NM FOR HEARING
Next Hearing Date: 29-02-2020
Date: 29-02-2020
Business: Adv. Mr. Vijay Prakash Yadav for plff. present.
Adv. Mr. Chandrashekhar for deft./MCGM present.
Mr. Mayurkumar Bhamare, Asst. Engg. (Maint.) \''S\'' ward, MCGM present.
Exh.3- Letters from Mediation center
Exh.4- Letter of Judge Mediator with consent terms.
Exh.5- Consent terms with signature of plff and deft. and
both side ld advocates.
Exh.6- Indemnity bond.
Exh.7- No objection given by Pramila Kocharekar.
Exh.8- No objection given by Nirmalaben Palande.
Exh.9- Copy of allotment letter. (original is handed over to
plff.)
Heard both side ld advocates, plffs vide Exh.7 and 8
admitted the contents are explained to them in vernacular
by their lawyer.
It is admitted by both side ld. advocates that the consent
terms in present suit are in pursuance to PAP policy dtd.
20.03.2017, 29.06.2019 and allotment letter bearing no.
ACS/30421/AEMS, dtd. 28.01.2020.
Suit is disposed of as per compromise terms vide Exh.5.
Decree be drawn accordingly.
Considering urgency of road widening project, it is agreed
between both side that possession of new premises will be given to plff. and deft will initiate for demolition within a week. Otherwise parties may mention before the court on 09.03.2020 at 4.00p.m.
NM no. 1272/19 stands disposed of as suit is compromise.
Nature Of Disposal: COMPROMISE
Disposal Date: 29-02-2020