MISC APPEAL
Smt. Divya Dilip KapadiaVsChief Executive Officer +1 more
CNR MHCC0100198020184-COURT 04 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
CASE DISPOSED
Uncontested--OTHERWISE
Decision Date: 26th March 2019
TrustJury record updated 09 Sept 2026
Case Overview
- Registration Number
- 100028/2018
- Registration Date
- 14 Feb 2018
Advocates
1For Petitioner
For Respondent
Not available
Parties
3Petitioner
Acts & Sections
1Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) Act · Sec 9
Case History / Proceedings
Case History
Date: 15-02-2018 Business: Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. Exh.2Appellant files stay application. Respondent seeks time to file R and P. In the meanwhile the impugned order is stayed. Adjd. to 09/03/2018 for R and P. Next Purpose: AWAITING R AND P Next Hearing Date: 09-03-2018 Date: 09-03-2018 Business: Adv. Swapnil for pltff present. Adv. Jadhav for respondent present and filed R and P. TOR. Reply filed by respondent to stay application Exh.2. TOR and marked as Exh.3. Copy is served to other side. Earlier order to continue till next date. Adjd for final hearing on 18.04.18. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2018 Date: 18-04-2018 Business: Adv. Swapnil Varadkar for the appellant present. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. At the request of Ld. Counsel for appellant, by way of last opportunity, adjd. to 18/06/2018 for hearing. Earlier order to continue till next date. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 18-06-2018 Date: 18-06-2018 Business: CORAM HIS HONOUR THE 2nd ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE SHRI P.S.TARARE Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. Adjd. to 11/07/2018 for hearing. Earlier order to continue till next date. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2018 Date: 11-07-2018 Business: Adv. S.A. Waradkar for appellant present. None present for respondent. Kept back. Later on. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. At the request of Ld. Counsel for respondent, adjd. to 24/08/2018 for hearing. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2018 Date: 24-08-2018 Business: None for the appellant. Adv. Aiman i/b adv. Jadhav for respondent is present. Matter is adjourned to 01/10/2018 for arguments. Later on - Adv. Mr. Sudhakar Pandaram for appellant is present and requests to continue the earlier order. Earlier order to continue till next date. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2018 Date: 01-10-2018 Business: Adv. Mr. Karot for the appellant is present. Adv. Mr. M. D. Jadhav for the respondent is present. Adv. for appellant seeks adjournment. By way of last chance, matter is adjourned to 29/10/2018 for hearing. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 29-10-2018 Date: 29-10-2018 Business: Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Adv M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. Partly heard Ld. Counsel for appellant. Adjd. to 17/11/2018 at 12.30 p.m. for further hearing. Earlier order to continue till next date. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2018 Date: 17-11-2018 Business: Mr. Vilas Shirke, CA of appellant present. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. By consent, adjd. to 11/12/2018 for further hearing. Earlier order to continue till next date. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 11-12-2018 Date: 11-12-2018 Business: Adv. Swapnil A. Wardkar for Appellant present. None for respondents. As the Hon\''ble Principal Judge is on leave today, adjd to 14.01.2019 for hearing. Next Purpose: HEARING Next Hearing Date: 14-01-2019 Date: 14-01-2019 Business: Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for the appellant present. Adv. M.B. Jadhav for respondent present. Exh.4Appellant files pursis for remanding back the matter. Ld. Counsel for respondent recorded his reply on it. Heard both sides. It is brought to the notice of this Court that though an affidavit of evidence of Mr. Girish Sonawane on behalf of respondent No.1 was filed before the respondent No.2, however, the appellant was forced to cross examine one Mr. Thorat whose affidavit of evidence was not filed. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.1 Mr. Jadhav submitted to the order of the Court. It appears that respondent No.2 has not followed proper procedure for recording of evidence. In view of this, it is necessary to set aside the impugned order dated 12/01/2018 and to remand back the matter before respondent No.2 for recording of evidence on behalf of both the parties, by giving opportunity to cross examine the witnesses and deciding the matter afresh. Hence I pass the following order. O R D E R 1.The order dated 12/01/2018 is hereby set aside. 2.Misc. Appeal No.28/18 is remanded back before respondent No.2. 3.Respondent No.2 to record the evidence as adduced by the parties and decide the matter afresh on the basis of evidence on record. 4.Parties to appear before respondent No.2 on 20/02/2019. 5.R and P be sent back forthwith. Adjd. to 26/03/2019 for directions. Next Purpose: DIRECTIONS Next Hearing Date: 26-03-2019 Date: 26-03-2019 Business: Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Respondent and his adv. absent. It appears that by order dtd. 14.01.2019 the appeal is already decided and the matter is remanded back to the respondent No.2 for deciding afresh. However in the operative part of the order dtd. 14.01.2019 it was said that the matter is adj. to 26.03.2019 for directions. The Ld. adv. for appellant submits that in view of the aforesaid order the appeal is already disposed off and no further direction are required. Hence, it is directed that the appeal be treated as disposed off as per the order dtd. 14.01.2019. Accordingly the Misc Appeal No.28/18 it be shown as disposed off the Nature Of Disposal: OTHERWISE Disposal Date: 26-03-2019
Additional Case Details
Additional Case Details
Filing Number: 102101/2018 Filing Date: 06-02-2018 First Hearing Date: 15th February 2018 Decision Date: 26th March 2019 Court Number And Judge: 4-COURT 04 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
Orders
2Final Order 126 Mar 2019
26 Mar 2019
Order Details: Other Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF :COURT 4 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE Case No. :MISC APPEAL/0100028/2018 Smt. Divya Dilip Kapadia Vs 1. Chief Executive Officer 2.The Competent Authority For Greater Mumbai Date : 26-03-2019 Business : Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Respondent and his adv. absent. It appears that by order dtd. 14.01.2019 the appeal is already decided and the matter is remanded back to the respondent No.2 for deciding afresh. However in the operative part of the order dtd. 14.01.2019 it was said that the matter is adj. to 26.03.2019 for directions. The Ld. adv. for appellant submits that in view of the aforesaid order the appeal is already disposed off and no further direction are required. Hence, it is directed that the appeal be treated as disposed off as per the order dtd. 14.01.2019. Accordingly the Misc Appeal No.28/18 it be shown as disposed off the Nature of Disposal : OTHERWISE Disposal Date : 26-03-2019 COURT 4 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE -- 1 of 1 --
Order 126 Mar 2019
26 Mar 2019
Order Details: Other Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF :COURT 4 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE Case No. :MISC APPEAL/0100028/2018 Smt. Divya Dilip Kapadia Vs 1. Chief Executive Officer 2.The Competent Authority For Greater Mumbai Date : 26-03-2019 Business : Adv. Swapnil Waradkar for appellant present. Respondent and his adv. absent. It appears that by order dtd. 14.01.2019 the appeal is already decided and the matter is remanded back to the respondent No.2 for deciding afresh. However in the operative part of the order dtd. 14.01.2019 it was said that the matter is adj. to 26.03.2019 for directions. The Ld. adv. for appellant submits that in view of the aforesaid order the appeal is already disposed off and no further direction are required. Hence, it is directed that the appeal be treated as disposed off as per the order dtd. 14.01.2019. Accordingly the Misc Appeal No.28/18 it be shown as disposed off the Nature of Disposal : OTHERWISE Disposal Date : 26-03-2019 COURT 4 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE -- 1 of 1 --
TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.
