Tag: Ordinary Civil

Order - Status 2: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Court's or Judge's orders Registrar's orders None present. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDLI) Date : 21 NOVEMBER 2016 Three weeks time i.e. 13.12.2016 is granted to remove office objections. REGISTRAR (JUDLI) RJ I gpj / 21.11.2016

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO.16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant Petitioner Versus District Superintendent Land Record and others Respondents Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner. Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for the Respondents. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 30th NOVEMBER, 2016 P.C. 1 Heard Mr. P. G. Kathane, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. 2 Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 11.01.2017. In addition to service of notice through Court, the advocate for the Petitioner shall serve a private notice by Registered Post A.D. and/or by Courier service and/or by hand delivery on the Respondents and shall file affidavit of service before the returnable date. 3 The principal contention of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the consolidation proceedings are sought to be reopened after a period of 45 years. The parties are put to notice that in view of the narrow controversy involved the Petition may be heard and disposed of (905)-WPST-16416-16.doc*.* finally at the admission stage. In the meantime, there would be adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (c). [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ....Petitioner V/S District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli And Ors ....Respondent Mr. Pramod Gokul Kathane, for Petitioner. Mr. Manoj Ganpat Sawardekar, for R.No. 4A to 4K. Mr. S.D.Rayrikar, AGP, for R.Nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Bharat A. Punekar, R.No. 3. CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 22nd February, 2017 P.C. : S.O. to 8th March 2017 for admission. To be placed on supplementary board. Ad-interim relief granted earlier, to continue until then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ....Petitioner V/S District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli And Ors ....Respondent Ms Anusha A Kale i/b Shri Pramod Gokul Kathane For Petitioner Shri Akshay Bobade i/b Shri Bharat A Punekar R.no. 3 Shri S D Rayrikar, AGP R.no. 1 And 2 CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 8th March, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 10/03/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: wpst1641616(908) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION St. NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ..Petitioner Vs. District Superintendent Land Record Sangli & Ors ..Respondents Ms Arusha A Kale i/b Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner Mr. M. G. Sawardekar for the Respondent Nos.4A to 4E Mr. S. H. Kankal AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. Akshay Bobade for the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 10th MARCH, 2017 P.C. 1 The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to amend so as to annex a typed copy of the impugned order. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out within one week. List the Petition for admission on 2132017, to be shown on the supplementary board. [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3333 OF 2017 Mrs Janaki Subhash Sawant ..Petitioner Vs. District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli & Ors ..Respondents Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner Mr. S. D. Rayrikar AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. M. G. Sawardekar for the Respondent Nos.4(a) to 4(f) Mr. Akshay Bobade a/w Mr/ B. A. Punekar for the Respondent Nos.3, 5(a) to 5(f), 6(a) to 6(e) CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 21st MARCH, 2017 P.C. 1 The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 212016 passed by the District Superintendent of Land Records, Sangli, by which order the application for condonation of delay filed by the Respondent No.3 came to be allowed. The said order has been challenged on the ground that the District Superintendent of Land Record has condoned the delay merely on the ground that the principles of natural justice require that such delay is required to be condoned. The District Superintendent of Land Record has not come to a conclusion that the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 have shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay running into 45 years for discretion to be exercised in favour of the said Respondents. The application filed by the said Respondent No.3 was in respect of correcting the consolidation scheme which has been implemented in Village Bhose, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, as long back as in the year 1965. The Petitioner and the Respondent No.3 are the sons of one Dashrath Bandgar who had two other sons namely Laxman Dashrath Bandgar and Bhauso Dashrath Bandgar. It seems that Laxman and Bhauso have expired and their heirs are the Respondent Nos.5(a) to 5(f) and Respondent Nos.6(a) to 6(e) to the above Petition. However, the statements of the sons of the said Dashrath Bandgar were recorded before the Assistant Consolidation Officer in the year 1965 and it is the case of the Petitioner that the consolidation scheme was propounded on the basis of the said statement which was recorded by the Assistant Consolidation Officer. 2 The Learned Counsel for the parties i.e. Mr. Kathane for the Petitioner and Mr. Bobade for the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 sought to make submissions against and for condonation of delay. 3 In my view, it is not necessary to delve into the said aspect since the District Superintendent of Land Records, Sangli has without coming to a conclusion that sufficient cause for condonation of delay has been made out by the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 has condoned the said huge delay of 45 years. In my view, the interest of justice would be served if the impugned order dated 212016 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli for a denovo consideration of the application for condondation of delay. The parties may file additional pleadings if so advised before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli. The parties to appear before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli on 542017. The District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli thereafter may decide the application for condonation of delay by 155 2017 on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the instant order. Needless to state that the contentions of the parties are kept open for being urged before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli. 4 The Petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent and is disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7120 OF 2018 Mrs. Usha Shantaram Wadkar ....Petitioner V/S Saraswati Ganpatrao Yadav (decd) Thro. Lr. Raghunath Yadav (decd) Through Lrs. And Ors ....Respondent Indrajeet Anandrao Bhosale For Petitioner V.S.Talkute i/b. Jayprakash Shridhar Kapre Resp No. 2a To 2e, 3a To 3e, 4a To 4c, 6 To 8 For Respondent CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J DATE : 5th July, 2018 P.C. : Not on board. Taken on production board, by way of praecipe. No orders. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7120 OF 2018 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2024.12.04 16:54:31 +0530 Usha Shantaram Wadkar … Petitioner V/s. Saraswati Ganpatrao Yadav (Since Deceased) & Ors. … Respondents None for the petitioner. Ms. Rupika Narkar i/by Mr. Vishwanth Talkute for respondent No.7. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 4, 2024 P.C.: None for the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514/2018 Prashanti CHS Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Dy. Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w. Ms. Palak Patel & Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for the Petitioner CORAM: K.K. TATED & S. K. SHINDE, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 4, 2018 P.C. : 1 Heard. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the Petitioner challenges the order dated 31.05.2016 passed by the learned District Dy. Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mumbai – 4, the competent authority u/s.5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) Act,1963 rejecting the Petitioner's Application for deemed conveyance. 2 Hence, office to verify and place the matter before appropriate Bench. (S. K. SHINDE, J.) ( K. K. TATED, J. ) Basavraj Gurappa Patil Digitally signed by Basavraj Gurappa Patil Date: 2018.10.06 13:23:16 +0530 Basavraj G. Patil 1/1

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti CoOp. Hsg. Society Ltd. … Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Coop. Society & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Zain Mookhi a/w Ms. Palak Patel and Ms. Janhavi Doshi for the Petitioner. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1 State. CORAM : V.L. ACHLIYA, J. DATE : 13th FEBRUARY, 2019. P.C. : Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 13.03.2019. Learned A.G.P. waives the notice for Respondent No.1. In addition the service through the process of Court, the Petitioner is granted liberty to serve the Respondents by all other modes of service as permissible in law. Parties are put to notice that Petition may be heard finally at the stage of admission. (V.L. ACHLIYA, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Cooperative Housing Society Limited .....Petitioner V/s. District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative .....Respondents Society and others Mr. Zain M. a/w Ms. Janhavi Doshi i/b Mansukhlal H. & Co. for the Petitioner Mr. Sandeep Maurya for Respondent no. 6 Mr. Rajesh A. Kanojia for Respondent nos. 2 to 5 CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, J. DATE : MARCH 13, 2019. P.C. The learned counsel appearing for Respondents seek three weeks time so as to enable them to file reply. 2 Time is granted as prayed for. Stand over to 08/04/2019. Needless to observe that copy of the reply be served upon the learned counsel for the Petitioner in advance. [S. S. SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ….. Petitioner VERSUS District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society & Ors. ….. Respondents Mr.Zain Mookhi, i/b. Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company for the Petitioner. Mr.S.D.Rayrikar, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Ms.Krishna Borkate, i/b. Mr.R.A.Kanojia for the Respondent nos. 3 to 5. Mr.Sandeep Maurya for the Respondent no.6. CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : th APRIL, 2019 8 P.C . Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 to 5 by way of last opportunity prays for time till 22nd April,2019 for filing reply. Time granted as prayed for as last opportunity. A copy of the reply shall be served in advance upon the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. List the writ petition on board on 26th April,2019. [S.S.SHINDE, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ....Petitioner V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society ....Respondent And Ors CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J DATE : 26th April, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 19.07.2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: 44-WP-8514-18.DOC Sayali Upasani IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.- 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-Op Hsg. Soc. Ltd ...Petitioner Vs. District Deputy Registrar of Co-op Soc. And Others ...Respondents Ms. Sayali Puri i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co., for Petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No. 6. Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5. Mr. S. H. Kankale, AGP for State. CORAM:- N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED:- 3rd JULY, 2023 PC:- Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Mr. Parwani, the learned Counsel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and undertakes to file Vakalatnama. It seems that the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 have already filed an affidavit-in-reply. By way of final indulgence, three weeks time is granted to the Counsel to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and work out the matter. Stand over to 24th July, 2023. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR J DATE : 24th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 07/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited....PETITIONER V/S District Deputy Registrar Of Cooperative Society And Ors ....RESPONDENT Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Sayali Puri and Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/b Mansukhlal Hiralal and Co for Petitioner Mr. Piyush Raheja i/b Rajesh Parwani for Respondent No. 2 to 5 Mr. C. D. Mali AGP for State for Respondent No. 1 CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP V. MARNE J DATE : 4th September, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 25/09/2023 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8514 OF 2018 Prashanti Co-operative Housing Society Limited ...Petitioner Versus District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Society and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Akash Rebello a/w Ms. Purvi Asheri, Ms. Sayali Puri, Mr. Mohammed Lokhandwala i/by Mansukhlal Hiralal & Co. for Petitioner. … … Mr. Piyush Raheja i/by Mr. Rajesh Parwani, for Respondent Nos.2 to 5. Mr. Sandeep Maurya, for Respondent No.6. Mr. P. P. Pujari, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 25 2023. P.C.: Petitioner-Society has filed this Petition challenging order dated 31 May 2016 passed by District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City (4) and Competent Authority rejecting the application filed by Petitioner-Society for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance. I have heard Mr. Rebello, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner, Mr. Raheja, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, Mr. Maurya, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.6 and Mr. Pujari, the learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent No.1. Perusal of the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 would indicate that the main reason why the Competent Authority had rejected the application for deemed conveyance is the alleged amalgamation of plot of Petitioner-Society with the neighbouring plot of Nirmal's Nest Cooperative Housing Society. ("Nirmal's Nest"). Another ground for rejection is nonimpleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society. I find both the grounds of rejection to be totally untenable. Firstly, there is no concrete evidence of two plots being amalgamated. Reliance is placed on a communication issued by the Municipal Corporation on 19 October 2007 for the purpose of arriving at a conclusion that there is amalgamation of plots bearing C.T.S. No.2403 of Plot Eksar and C.T.S. No.436 of Village Borivali. The relevant portion of the communication reads thus: " Your plans submitted of the layout/amalgamation of above plot along with your letter dated 20.10.2006 are approvable as they are as per Development Control Rules, subject to the terms and conditions already registered under No.BDR2-06908-2007 dated 16.10.2007. These terms and conditions of the layout shall be binding not only on the Owners for the time being but also on their heirs executors, administrators, assignees and every person deriving title through or under them. Final approval to the amalgamation/layout will be given after you construct the roads including lighting, drainage, sewerage, etc and recreation amenity spaces is developed by leveling and adequate number of trees are provided on the same. You will please make it clear to your client that in case of breach of any of the terms and conditions, the deposit amount is liable to be forfeited and the permission granted liable to be revoked." The communication of Municipal Corporation dated 19 October 2007 would indicate that the Municipal Corporation had merely stated that the proposal of amalgamation was "approvable". The communication does not approve the amalgamation nor effects such amalgamation. Furthermore, the amalgamation of plots will have to be done by Revenue Authorities and not by Municipal Corporation. Municipal Corporation, being a Planning Authority, may consider whether joint development could be carried out on two neighbouring plots. Actual amalgamation of two C.T.S. numbers will have to be ultimately approved by the revenue authorities. Furthermore even if such amalgamation was to take effect on the basis of communication dated 19 October 2007, the same would have no effect on right of Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance in respect of plot bearing C.T.S No.436, Village Borivali. It is submitted that a common developer appointed by Petitioner and Nirmal's Nest Society, who had decided to construct building on both plots and had moved a proposal before MCGM for sanctioning plans on amalgamated plots. That the said developer had already been removed and at present there is no proposal for effecting joint development on two plots. Be that as it may. The amalgamation has not actually been effected and even if it was to be effected, the same would not defeat the right of the Petitioner-Society to seek deemed conveyance. The ground of non impleadment of Nirmal's Nest Society for rejection of unilateral deemed conveyance by the competent authority is also unfounded. The Petitioner-Society is claiming deemed conveyance of land on which its building is standing. For considering that application, why presence of neighbouring society is necessary is difficult to fathom. I am therefore of the view that the presence of Nirmal's Nest Society is not necessary while deciding application for grant of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of Petitioner-Society. I therefore find that the impugned order dated 31 May 2016 passed by the competent authority to be indefensible. The competent authority is required to ignore the aspect of amalgamation and reconsider the application filed by Petitioner-society for grant of deemed conveyance. Accordingly, order dated 31 May 2016 is set aside and the proceedings are remanded to the competent authority for a fresh decision. All contention of parties, except on issues of amalgamation and joinder of Nirmal Nest Society, are let open. The Writ Petition is accordingly partly allowed. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CAUSE TITLES AND APPEARANCES AS NOTIFIED ...... CORAM : N.M. Jamdar, J. 15 July 2016. P.C. :- On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on daily board dated 15 July 2016, stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS as under :- For condonation of delay A/N Matter at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 64 05.08.2016 65 25.08.2016 For Orders (Restoration) Matter at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 66 to 71 72 to 74 75 to 80 81 to 84 25.08.2016 26.08.2016 29.08.2016 30.08.2016 For restoration (admitted) Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 85 to 86 30.08.2016 87 to 89 31.08.2016 For Orders (Early Hearing Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 90 & 91 31.08.2016 92 to 94 01.09.2016 For Orders Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 98 01.09.2016 99 05.08.2016 100,101 01.09.2016 102 22.03.2017 103 01.09.2016 104 & 105 05.08.2016 106 to 109 02.09.2016 110 06.09.2016 A.O. for Admission Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 111 19.09.2016 M.C.A. fresh Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 112 18.10.2016 112 10.10.2010 M.C.A. Admission After Notice Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date For Admission Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date For Admission Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date For Admission fresh Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 117 to 122 23.03.2017 123 to 127 24.03.2017 For Admission After Notice Matters at Sr.No. Next C.M.I.S. date 128 to 131 02.08.2016 132 to 135 03.08.2016 If in any of the above matters, ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If ad-interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (N.M. Jamdar, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1033 OF 2016 IN SECOND APPEAL NO. 806 OF 2011 Sandeep Manohar Chavan ....Applicant V/s. 1. Smt. Suvarna Sudhakar Pawaskar and Ors. ....Respondents Mr. Devendra Pawar i/by. R.D. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Applicant/Appellant. None for the Respondents. Coram :- N.M. Jamdar, J. Date :- 21 April 2017. P.C. :- The Second Appeal was dismissed in view of the order passed on 13th October, 2015 directing the Applicant to pay costs of Rs.5,000/-. Till date, the costs are not paid and restoration of the Second Appeal is sought. The restoration, will have to be on the payment of additional costs. Accordingly, the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) subject to the Applicant paying costs of Rs.10,000/- within a period of 4 weeks from today failing which the Appeal to stand dismissed for non-prosecution without reference to the Court. (N.M. Jamdar, J)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6517 OF 2017 Bholanath R. Shukla ...Petitioner vs. The Transport Engineer (Projects) ...Respondent Mr. Ajinkya Patil a/w. Mr. Dharmapal Dave i/b. Naik Patil Salvi & Associates, for the Petitioner. Mr. B.B. Sharma, for RespondentCIDCO. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M. S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : JUNE 19, 2017 P.C.: . The learned counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the Petition with liberty to file a fresh Petition if occasion so arises. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. (M. S. SONAK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.13748 OF 2018 Vijesh K. Khimasia & Ors. Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents --- Mr.P.J. Thorat i/by Mr.S.P.Thorat for the petitioner. Mr.S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for the respondent no.1-State. Mr.P.K. Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate and Ms.Manorama Mohanty i/by M/s.S.K. Srivastav & Co. for the respondent nos.2 and 3. CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA, J. DATE : 2nd May 2018 P.C.: . Papers are allowed to be produced at 3.00 p.m. Mr.Thorat, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks liberty to withdraw this petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings after election of managing body of the respondent no.2 is held on 6th May 2018. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. No order as to costs. R.D. DHANUKA, J.

Order - Status 5: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 95 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6112 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Court's or Judge's orders Registrar's orders None present. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDLI) Date : 21 APRIL 2017 As per order passed by Registrar (JudicialI) on 19.01.2017, W.P. stands dismissed without further reference to the Court. Hence, this Civil Application filed for bringing legal heirs of deceased Petitioner, become infractous as does not survive. REGISTRAR (JUDLI) RJ I gpj / 21.04.2017

Order - Status 9: Vidya Amin FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 95 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6112 OF 2016 Eknath Yeshwant Bondre (Decd) through LRs Mrs. Sharvari S. Mirashi & Ors. … Applicants Versus Madhav Prakash Joglekar & Ors. … Respondents Mr. S.C. Wakankar, Advocate for the applicants. CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE: 2 nd August, 2018. P.C.: This Application is moved for bringing legal heirs of deceased applicant/petitioner no. 1-Ekanth Yeshwant Bondre. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that petitioner-Eknath Bondre died on 17th October, 2016 and Civil Application was filed on 11th January, 2017, i.e., within 90 days, hence the legal heirs of petitioner no. 1 are to be brought on record. In view of this submissions, the legal heirs of deceased petitioner no. 1 is brought on record. Civil Application is allowed. Amendment to be carried out till 7th August, 2018. The amended copy of the petition is to be served on the other side. In Writ Petition, issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 18th September, 2018. Additionally private service allowed. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3702 OF 2019 Maha. Police Co-op. Housing Federation Ltd. .. Petitioner Versus Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Soc. (No.2) Ltd. and Ors. .. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30032 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30028 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30031 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30036 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30030 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30029 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30034 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30033 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30035 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3702 OF 2019 Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. .. Applicant In the matter between: Maharashtra Police Co-operative Housing Federation Limited .. Petitioner Versus Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and Ors. .. Respondents .................... Mr. V.S.Kapse i/by Mr. N.S.Rajeshirke for Petitioner Mr. Mandar Limaye i/by Mr. S.S.Aradhye for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. S. H. Kankal, AGP for State Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 Mr. Vivek Walavalkar i/by Mr. Abhijeet Gosavi for Intervenor ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : DECEMBER 12, 2022. P.C. : Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. As informed to the Court, 10 out of the 14 Societies are ready for redevelopment. There are certain issues which are required to be looked into. The 4 reluctant Societies are now represented by Mr. Limaye and Mr. Aradhye (learned Advocates for Respondent Nos.1 to 4) before the Court. This Court had directed both Advocates to use their good officers to see if the said Societies bury their differences and participate in the redevelopment. Admittedly, the redevelopment is at the behest of Federation. One of the grievance mentioned by Mr. Limaye is effective representation of the 4 reluctant Societies in the Federation. Mr. Walawalkar and Mr. Kapse both inform the Court that in so far as effective representation is concerned and disclosure of any other issues to the said Societies are concerned, they are open to the same. In view of the above, this Court makes it clear that unless and until the 4 reluctant Societies point out perversity in the actions of the Petitioner, this Court will be reluctant to cancel the registration. This observation is however prima facie, and subject to hearing the objectors. At the joint request of all learned Advocates for respective parties, stand over to 16th December, 2022. In the meanwhile, adinterim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. For the above reasons the 9 Interim Applications of the Societies for impleadment are allowed. Interim Application Nos. I.A.No. 30032 of 2022, I.A.No. 30028 of 2022, I.A.No.30031 of 2022, I.A.No. 30036 of 2022, I.A.No. 30030 of 2022, I.A.No. 30029 of 2022, I.A.No. 30034 of 2022, I.A.No. 30033 of 2022 and I.A.No. 30035 of 2022 are disposed of in terms of prayer clause (a) which is identical in all Applications and reads thus: "(a) Allow the Applicant to intervene in the present matter and be further pleased to direct the Petitioner to join the Applicant as a party respondent to the present writ petition," Necessary amendment to be carried out by tomorrow. Re-verification is dispensed with. Copy of the amended cause title shall be provided to the Respondents before the next date. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] SONALI SATISH KILAJE Digitally signed by SONALI 14:37:27 +0530