Order Details: Other Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF :COURT 5 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE Case No. :SUIT/0100467/2018 Mr. Natobar Satkari Chowdhary Vs 1. MCGM 2. Asst. Municipal Commissioner 3. Asst. Engineer Date : 22-02-2018 Business : Resumed. Adv. H.P. Pandey for plaintiff, Adv Dhumale for BMC along with Adv. Pradeep Hemraj Patle JE, Building and Factory department C ward are present. Adv. Pandey submits register NM 713/2018. Mr. Patle submits that the corporation has not issued any notice to the…
SUIT - SHORT CAUSE CIVIL SUIT
Mr. Natobar Satkari ChowdharyVsMCGM +2 more
CNR MHCC0100237220185-COURT 05 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
City Civil Court, Mumbai
Mumbai · Maharashtra (MH)
CASE DISPOSED
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Decision Date: 22nd February 2018
TrustJury record updated 09 Sept 2026
Case Overview
- Registration Number
- 100467/2018
- Registration Date
- 15 Feb 2018
Advocates
1For Petitioner
For Respondent
Not available
Parties
4Petitioner
Respondent
Acts & Sections
1Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land (Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) Act · Sec 39
Case History / Proceedings
Case History
Date: 17-02-2018 Business: Mentioned by Praceipe. NOB. TOB. Plaintiff, Adv. H. P. Pande for plaintiff, Adv. Dhumale for BMC are present. Adv. Pande submits draft NM seeking preventive reliefs that any action should not be taken against the suit structure without following due process of law. Leave to register is granted. Heard respective advocates. Adv. Dhumale submits that the documents annexed to the plaint do not pertain to the suit structure. Adv. Pande submits that the plaintiff has not yet received any notice or order from the defendant. The plaintiff has only put tarpaulin sheet over the suit structure. Under such circumstance it is necessary to have reply of defendant on record. Adjd. for reply and arguments on ad-interim to 22.02.2018. Next Purpose: REPLY Next Hearing Date: 22-02-2018 Date: 22-02-2018 Business: Resumed. Adv. H.P. Pandey for plaintiff, Adv Dhumale for BMC along with Adv. Pradeep Hemraj Patle JE, Building and Factory department C ward are present. Adv. Pandey submits register NM 713/2018. Mr. Patle submits that the corporation has not issued any notice to the plaintiff till date. He further submits that the corporation will initiate action, if any against the plaintiff only by following due process of law. His statement is accepted and taken on record. Adv. Pandey submits that under such circumstances suit and NM may be disposed off. Adv. Dhumale makes similar submission that Considering the statement made by Mr. Patle, JE suit and NM may be disposed off. Considering the submissions made by respective advocates and the statement made by Mr. Patle, JE, C ward, the suit and NM are disposed off. No order as to costs. An ordinary copy of this order, duly authenticated by the Sheristedar of this court be supplied to the concerned parties. Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED Disposal Date: 22-02-2018
Additional Case Details
Additional Case Details
Filing Number: 102639/2018 Filing Date: 14-02-2018 First Hearing Date: 12th April 2018 Decision Date: 22nd February 2018 Court Number And Judge: 5-COURT 05 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE
Orders
2Final Order 1Full order available
22 Feb 2018
Order 1Full order available
22 Feb 2018
Order Details: Other Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF :COURT 5 ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE Case No. :SUIT/0100467/2018 Mr. Natobar Satkari Chowdhary Vs 1. MCGM 2. Asst. Municipal Commissioner 3. Asst. Engineer Date : 22-02-2018 Business : Resumed. Adv. H.P. Pandey for plaintiff, Adv Dhumale for BMC along with Adv. Pradeep Hemraj Patle JE, Building and Factory department C ward are present. Adv. Pandey submits register NM 713/2018. Mr. Patle submits that the corporation has not issued any notice to the…
TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.
