Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Kirit Ramji Thakkar V/s. BMC
Received on : 21/08/2019
Registered on : 22/08/2019
Decided on : 03/03/2021
Duration : Y- 01: M-06: D-10:
Exhibit :
[
IN THE COURT OF CITY CIVIL FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
MISC.APPEAL NO.149 OF 2019
(CNR NO.:MHCC01-008651-2019)
Kirit Ramji Thakkar,
Age 71 years, an adult
Indian Inhabitant of Mumbai,
tenant in respect of Shop No.4,
situated at Tabela Chawl,
Patthe Bapurao Marg,
Grant Road(E), Mumbai-400 004. ... Appellant
Versus
1. The Municipal Corporation of
Greater Mumbai, a body Corporate
Duly constituted under the provision
of B.M.C. Act, 1888, Having their head
office at Mahapalika Bhavan,
Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai-400 001. ...Respondents
CORAM: H.H.THE PRINCIPAL JUDGE
S. B. AGRAWAL (C.R.No.19)
DATED: 3rd MARCH, 2021
Ld.Counsel Mr.P. D. Gandhy a/w Adv.Hardik Desai ,
for appellant.
Ld.Counsel Mr.Dharmesh Vyas a/w Adv. Vikram Walawalkar and
Adv.Mr.A.V. Diwate,
for respondents/BMC.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Notice issued by the Asst. Commissioner(Estate) U/s.105(B) of
the MMC Act on 20/04/2019 and the order dated 20/08/2019 passed
by the Asst. Commissioner, D-Ward is assailed in the present appeal.
page 1 of 4
03/02/2021
-- 1 of 4 --
Kirit Ramji Thakkar V/s. BMC
2. It was contended by the learned Counsel for the respondents on
the last date that in fact final order U/s.105(B) of MMC Act has not
been passed by the Bombay Municipal Corporation and even inquiry has
not been initiated against the appellant as such the appeal itself is
premature. It is also contended that notice dated 20/04/2019 and the
purported order dated 20/08/2019 are the communication addressed to
the appellant prior to initiation of these statutory proceedings.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant upon this argument submitted
that in case the respondents are ready to make a statement that they
would not take any coercive action against the appellant without
following the procedure prescribed under MMC Act i.e. for eviction
holding inquiry U/.105(B) of the MMC Act and for demolition the
prescribed procedure as per MMC Act, the appeal may be disposed of.
4. Today learned Counsel for the respondents/BMC submits that he
has received instructions from the respondents and the officer of the
respondents namely Mr.Pramod Narayan Kalme, Asst. Engineer (B & F)
Department present and that they are making a statement that the
appellant would neither be evicted unless inquiry U/s.105(B) of MMC is
completed, nor the premises of the appellant would be demolished
further without following the procedure prescribed under the MMC
Act., the statement is accepted.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant than contends that part of his
premises have been demolished but then in respect of the same he will
have to avail the appropriate remedy as per law and the same cannot be
page 2 of 4
03/03/2021
-- 2 of 4 --
Kirit Ramji Thakkar V/s. BMC
agitated and considered in the present appeal. In that view of the
matter, learned counsel for the appellant has no objection for disposing
of the appeal and as such, I pass following order.
O R D E R
1. Misc.Appeal No.149 of 2019 stands disposed of subject to the
undertaking given by the respondents as narrated hereinabove.
2. Interim order stands vacated.
Sd/-
03/03/2021 (S. B. AGRAWAL)
PRINCIPAL JUDGE,
CITY CIVIL COURT, MUMBAI.
Dictated on : 03/03/2021
Transcribed on : 03/03/2021
Signed by HHJ on : 03/03/2021
page 3 of 4
03/03/2021
-- 3 of 4 --
Kirit Ramji Thakkar V/s. BMC
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE TIME NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
04/03/2021 11.25am B.R.HATEKAR S.G.
Name of the Judge HH PRINCIPAL JUDGE (CR No.19)
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment/Order. 0303/2021
Judgment/order signed by P.O on 03/03/2021
Judgment/order uploaded on 04/03/2021
page 4 of 4
03/03/2021
-- 4 of 4 --