Farzana Mohd. Ali Chatriwala - Suit Stamp No.7658 of 2018VsBMC +1 more

Date: 03-07-2018
Business: Resumed.
The P.O. is busy in judgment in N. M. No.2300 of 2018 in L.C. Suit No.1524 of 2018 For want of time  the board is discharged.
Adjd for NM reply to 28.08.2018
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 28-08-2018

Date: 28-08-2018
Business: Resumed.
The P.O. is busy in recording evidence in Sessions Case No. 577/2017 and 99/2018.  For want of time the board is discharged.
Adjd for NM reply to 30.08.2018.
Next Purpose: NM REPLYREJOINDER
Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2018

Date: 30-08-2018
Business: Resumed.
Adv. B.P. Shukla for plaintiff and Adv. Rawade for MCGM are present.
Adv. Shukla filed Vakalatnama
In order to maintain proper record following Exh. Are marked -
Exh. 1 - Plaint
Exh. 2 - Vakalatnama. O- Seen and filed.
Exh. 3 - Address Memo. O- R and R.
Exh. 4 - List of documents. O - Seen and filed.
Exh. 5 - Affidavit in support of plaint.
Exh. 6 Vakalatnama of Adv. Shukla for plaintiff.
Adv. Shukla tendered draft NM with affidavit seeking reliefs of ad-interim injunction.  Leave to register is granted.
  Adv. Shukla also tendered draft Ch/s with affidavits seeking amendment to the plaint.  Leave to register is granted.
Adv. Rawade seeks time to file reply to NM and Ch/s.
Adjd for reply to NM and Ch/s to 11.09.2018.
Next Purpose: REPLY
Next Hearing Date: 11-09-2018

Date: 11-09-2018
Business: Resumed.
Adv. B.P. Shukla for plaintiff and Adv. Rawade for MCGM are present.
Ld. Adv for plaintiff submits that the defendant corporation without considering the reply dtd. 24.08.2018, filed by the plaintiff to the notice issued U/s 351 of MMC Act and in violation of the principles laid down in the case of Sopan Maruti Thopte is proceeding to demolish the notice structure.  According to him the men and machinery of the defendant corporation are on the site and they will demolish the notice structure.  According to him earlier ad-interim relief was rejected.  Thereafter the plaintiff took out a Ch/s and the same is pending.  He prays for a direction to the corporation to consider the reply dtd. 24.08.2018 and pass order and till then maintain status quo at the site.
  On the other hand, the ld. Advocate for defendant corporation submits that on 14.12.2018, ad-interim relief was rejected on merits and the plaintiff has not challenged that order and therefore at present any such relief cannot be granted.
  In reply the ld. Adv. for plaintiff submits that why the defendant is not considering the reply and passing a fresh order.
     Considering the rival submissions and copies of documents placed on record it prima facie appears that a show cause notice was issued on 10.04.2018.  The plaintiff did not reply the same and therefore, the defendant on 15.05.2018 passed a speaking order directing to demolish the notice structure, which resulted in institution of this suit on 12.06.2018.  Ad-interim relief was rejected on 14.06.2018.  Nothing is place on record to show that the plaintiff has challenged that order and any interim relief has been granted in the appeal.  It appears that after laps of 2 months, on 24.08.2018, the plaintiff filed a reply to the notice dtd. 10.04.2018 with copies of rent receipts, ration card, Aadhar card, electricity bill and assessment bill etc.   According to ld. Adv. For plaintiff the first date of assessment is 31.03.1961 and therefore the notice structure is authorized or tolerated and therefore, the concern designated officer should again pass an order.           Prima facie I do not find that the defendant has violated the principles laid down in the case of Sopan Maruti Thopte. On the contrary it appears that the plaintiff did not reply the show cause notice within stipulated time and further challenged the same by filing the present suit.  The ch/s seeking wholesome amendment of the plaint is pending.  Under such circumstance when the plaintiff is not protecting own rights by diligently replying the notice and in the event of rejection of ad-interim reliefs, intervention of this Court on NM No. 3357/2018 is not at all warranted.  Therefore the following order is passed -
Ad-interim relief is rejected.
Matter adjd for Ch/s arguments to 25.09.2018.
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2018

Date: 25-09-2018
Business: The P.O. is on leave.
Adjd for  C/S argument to 17.11.2018
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 17-11-2018

Date: 17-11-2018
Business: Resumed.
None for plaintiff.  Adv. Ravade for MCGM is present.  Plaintiff is directed to get register the suit on or before next date failing which necessary orders will be passed.
Adjd for Ch/s arguments to 08.01.2019.
Next Purpose: C/S ARGUMENTS
Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2019

Date: 08-01-2019
Business: Resumed.
Adv. Abhishek Shukla for plaintiff and Adv. Ravade for MCGM are present.
Adv. Shukla submits that the suit structure is already demolished.  He undertakes to get the suit register on or before next date.   He wishes to withdraw the suit by keeping plaintiff present.
Adjd for withdrawal of the suit to 29.01.2019.
Next Purpose: WITHDRAWAL
Next Hearing Date: 29-01-2019

Date: 29-01-2019
Business: Resumed.
None for plaintiff.
Adv. Ravade for MCGM submits that structure is already demolished and not A.O. is pending before Hon\''ble High Court.  It is the same submission made by Adv. Shukla on last date.  Today neither the plaintiff nor his advocate are present.
    The suit is not yet registered.  Earlier it was fixed for arguments on Ch/s but on 08.01.2019, advocate for plaintiff submitted that the plaintiff will withdraw the suit.
    Due to absence of plaintiff and his advocate, it appears that the plaintiff is not interested to prosecute the suit, Ch/s and NM.
  Therefore, the suit is dismissed in default of appearance of the plaintiff.  The Ch/s No. 1626/2018,  NM No. 3357/2018 and NM No. 2250/2018 are also dismissed in default of appearance of plaintiff.
  The plaintiff is directed to get registered the suit for statistical purpose only.
Nature Of Disposal: DISMISSED IN DEFAULT
Disposal Date: 29-01-2019

Filing Number: 108026/2018
Filing Date: 19-06-2018
First Hearing Date: 03rd July 2018
Decision Date: 29th January 2019
Court Number And Judge: 5-COURT 05  ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE