All Cases

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL NOS.1 & 2 ON THE BOARD DATED 8TH AUGUST, 2008 CAUSE TITLES AND APPERANCES AS NOTIFIED .... CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : AUGUST 8, 2008. P.C. : Both these matters are listed with office objection(s). I propose to pass common order in the following terms: (A) In cases where any of the Respondent(s) has/have not been served so far, for whatever reasons, the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) to take steps to serve the unserved Respondent(s) within EIGHT WEEKS from today by Advocate's notice, either personally or through speed post/courier/e-mail/fax and to file affidavit of service before that date, failing which, concerned Petition/Application to stand dismissed for non-prosecution, without further reference to the Court. (B) In case of any other office objection(s), the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) to take steps to remove the same within EIGHT WEEKS from today, failing which, the Petition/Application to stand dismissed for non-prosecution, without further reference to the Court. (C) If conditional order is complied in time in the above matters, the respective matter will be listed under appropriate caption on the following assigned dates. Sr.No. Assigned Date 1 & 2 18/11/2008 (D) Ad-interim order granted in any of the above said matters, if any, to continue till the next date of hearing. . Ordered accordingly. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)

Order - Status 9: dgm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION MATTERS NOTIFIED AT SERIAL NOS. 52 TO 65 ON THE BOARD DATED 18.11.2008 CAUSE TITLES & APPEARANCES AS NOTIFIED OfficeCourt's Notes, Office Memoranda or Judge's ofOrders Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. ------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA, J. DATED : 18.11.2008 P.C. S. O. to 28.11.2008 Interim order, if any, to continue till then. [ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.]

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2137 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3355 OF 1998 Baban Laxman Motkari & Anr. ..Applicants. V/s. Eknath N. Motkari & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.Anand Kulkarni i/b.Ms.Seema Sarnaik for applicants. Mr.M.M.Sathaye for Respondent Nos. 10A to 10K. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR,J DATE : JANUARY 23, 2009. P.C. : Although this application is opposed on the argument that delay is not properly explained, however, since no prejudice would be caused to the Respondent, in the interest of justice, Application deserves to be allowed. For, the main Writ Petition will nevertheless be proceeded by Petitioner No.1. Therefore, this application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) to (e) on condition that the Applicants shall pay cost to the Respondent Nos.10A to 10K quantified at Rs.1,000/- within one week, failing which Petition to stand dismissed for non-prosecution. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J)

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2435 OF 2012 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO.14663 OF 2012 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Advocate for the Appellant Present. CORAM : AJIT N. MARE, REGISTRAR (JUDL – II) Date : 31st March, 2016 In view of the dismissal of Civil Application for condonation of delay vide Court's order dated 12/01/2016, hence this Civil Application for stay does not survive and same is disposed of. sd/­ Registrar (Judl.­II) dsm – R(J­II) – 31.03.16

Order - Status 4: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 6: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 8: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 10: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 Siddharth Colony Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha and Ors. … Appellants V/s. The Municipal Corporation for Gr. Mumbai … Respondent Mr. Nilesh Pandey a/w Mr.Rahul Bhosale i/b. Equajuris for Appellants. Mr. Rajesh S. Patil a/w Smt. Madhuri More for Respondent-Corporation. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2021. P.C. : By an Order dated 25th June 2021, on the basis of statement made by the learned counsel for the Appellants that, the Appellants shall maintain status-quo and shall not carry out any further construction, this Court directed the Respondent Corporation not to take coercive action till next date of hearing. The present Appeal was thereafter adjourned from time to time for various reasons as has been recorded in earlier Orders. On 22nd November 2021, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent – Corporation had made a grievance that, by taking undue advantage of ad-interim relief granted by this Court, the Appellants are carrying out construction on footpath abutting the suit property. In support of his contention, he relied on certain photographs annexed to the reply of Interim Application. The matter was thereafter adjourned on 30th November 2021, however, on that day, due to some reasons the present Appeal could not be listed on board. The Respondent-Corporation through their Advocate thereafter circulated the present praecipe dated 7th December 2021 seeking urgent hearing of the present Appeal. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Corporation again reiterated that, the Appellants by taking undue advantage of the Order dated 25th June 2021 are still carrying out construction on footpath attaching to the suit property. He drew my attention to the basic pleadings of the Appellants in the plaint of L.C. Suit (St.) No.4560 OF 2021 and in particular para No.10 thereof. It has been categoricaly pleaded by the Appellant that, the newly appointed developer started process of development activities at said plot of land and in order to redevelopment of the said plot of land the Plaintiffs/Appellants herein vacated the suit premises and handed it over to the Plaintiff No.1 for the purpose of site office as required to deal with occupants at large on site. It is further pleaded that, the Plaintiff No.1/Appellant No.1 herein has taken possession of the suit premises from its members being Plaintiff No.2 and 3 and Others. In this precise background, learned counsel for the Appellants had made a statement on 25th June 2021 and as noted earlier. Repeated grievances are made before this Court that by taking undue advantage of Order dated 25th June 2021, the Appellants are carrying out further construction on footpath. It is therefore necessary to direct the Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai to immediately visit the suit property today at 3.00 O'clock and inspect it. If it noticed that, the Appellants have carried out construction at the suit premises after 25th June 2021, to record a finding accordingly and submit a detailed report to this Court on next occasion i.e. on 17th December 2021. The present Order is passed in open Court in presence of learned counsel for the Appellants and learned counsel for the Respondent-Corporation. The Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation therefore shall not wait for a copy of the present Order and shall inspect the suit premises today at 3.00 p.m. without giving any excuse. The Appellants are directed to maintain status-quo as of 12.00 noon of 8th December 2021. The Chairman of Appellant No.1 and Appellant Nos.2 and 3 along with their Advocate are permitted to remain present at the time of inspection by the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai. The Senior Inspector of Police, Chembur Police Station is directed to provide necessary police protection to the Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai at the time of his inspection, to avoid any untoward incident or breach of law and order situation at the suit property. Stand over to 17th December 2021. [A.S. GADKARI, J.] MANOJ R TANDALE Digitally signed by MANOJ R TANDALE Date: 2021.12.08 14:19:06 +0530

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD QAYYUM Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD Date: 2022.02.18 17:54:12 +0530 Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Alongwith Interim Application No. 3413 / 2021 in Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Siddharth Colony Vikas Seva Sang Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Through its Chief Promoter Mr. r. Waghmare and Ors. … Appellants Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai … Respondent **** Mr. Nilesh R. Pandey i/by Equa Juris, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. Rajesh Patil, Counsel for MCGM. Mr. Ravindra Sirsikar, Advocate for MCGM. **** CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2022. P.C. Appellants shall implead the Slum Rehabilitation Authority as a party Respondent. Amendment shall be carried out forthwith. Learned Counsel shall serve amended copy of the appeal on Counsel for the Corporation and also to the newly added Respondent. Stand over to 11th March, 2022. Ad-interim relief to continue till the next date. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 9: Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD OHAMMAD QAYYUM QAYYUM Date: 2022.03.11 18:38:02 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Alongwith Interim Application No. 3413 / 2021 in Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Chief Promoter. Mr. R. Waghmare ... Appellant Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ... Respondent **** Mr. Nilesh R. Pandey i/by Equa Juris, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Rajesh Patil a/w Mr. Ravindra Sirsikar, Advocate for the MCGM/ Respondent No.1. Mr. Yogesh Patil i/by Mr. Vijay Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. DATE : $11^{th}$ MARCH, 2022. P.C. Mr. Patil waives on behalf of the Respondent No.2 – Slum Rehabilitation Authority. He seeks time to file reply. Time granted. Appellant may file the rejoinder/ reply before the returnable date. Stand over to 26th April, 2022. Interim relief if any, shall continue to operate till the next date. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN J DATE : 27th June, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 06/07/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 19th October, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 16/11/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 16th November, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 15/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 697 OF 2014 Shashikant Chandrakant Rane vs. … Applicant The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents Mr. R. Sathyanarayanan, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Alpa Javeri, APP for the State. I.O. Mr. P.D. Kadam, A.S.I., LCB, Ratnagiri present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 17th June, 2014. P.C. This Application for anticipatory bail is moved directly before this Court. Learned APP, on instructions from the police constable of Ratnagiri Police Station, makes a statement that on the basis of complaint of Mrs. Suhasini Chavan, no offence is registered at Ratnagiri Police Statement. The learned counsel for the applicant seeks permission to withdraw this Application, as the applicant/accused wants to file an Application before the Sessions Court, Thane. As the offence is registered at C.R. No. I264/2013 with Dombivli Police Station, Thane, the learned counsel is allowed to withdraw this Application for anticipatory bail with liberty to file an Application before Sessions Court, Thane. Hence, the Application for the anticipatory bail is dismissed as withdrawn. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4796 OF 2010 Shamrao Mahadev Phate : Petitioner V/s. The Collector & District Election Officer, Solapur & Ors. : Respondents .... Mr.S.S.Salunkhe for the petitioner. Mr.S.N.Patil, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent nos.1 & 2. .... CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : JUNE 23, 2010. P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner orally seeks permission to implead Solapur District Central Co-operative Bank as a partyrespondent. Leave granted. Appropriate amendment in the cause title be carried out forthwith. Notice before admission, returnable on 12.7.2010. Mr.Patil, the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, waives service for the respondent nos.1 & 2. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.4796 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.S.S.Salunkhe for the petitioner. Mr.S.N.Patil, AGP for resp. nos.1 & 2. Mr.Sarag Aryadha for respondent no.3. Mr.S.S.Inamdar for respondent no.4. CORAM : D.D. SINHA AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE : JULY 09, 2010. P.C.: Considering the cause of action involved, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to mention the matter before the appropriate Court. Permission granted. (D.D. SINHA, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 WRIT PETITION NO.4796 OF 2010 Petitioner Respondents Mr.S.S.Rajeshirke for petitioner. Mr.S.N.Bhosale, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr.Sarang Aradhye for respondent no.3. Mr.Inamdar for respondent no.4. CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. DATE : 12th July 2010 PC : Not on on board. In view of urgency, the production is allowed and matter is taken on board. Heard Mr.Rajeshirke for the petitioner, Mr.Aradhye for respondent no.3, Mr.Inamdar for respondent no.4 and Mr.Bhosale, learned AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. The petition pertains to the election of respondent no.4 The Solapur District Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Solapur (hereinafter referred to as "the said bank"). The Gardi Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd; Gardi (hereinafter referred to as "the Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd.") is the member of respondent no.4. The said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd. passed a resolution on 20th March 2010 thereby nominating the respondent no.3 as it's delegate to take part in the general election of respondent no.4 bank. The resolution was sent to the respondent no.4 bank by the said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd. and respondent no.3's name was shown in provisional voters list as a delegate of said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd.. The petitioner contends that a resolution came to be passed by the said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd. on 24th March 2010 thereby nominating him as a delegate of the said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd.. In spite of this resolution, his name is not entered into the provisional voters list. An objection was raised before the Collector, however, the same was rejected only on the ground that the signature of the Secretary of the said Society does not appear on the resolution. By order dated 18th March 2010, the learned Collector rejected the petitioner's petitioner for non inclusion of his name in the provisional voters list as a delegate of the said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd.. The final voters list thereafter was published in the month of May 2010 and against the name of said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd; the name of respondent no.3 is shown as it's delegate. Rule 16 programme was subsequently published on 3rd July 2010 and the last date for filing the nomination is today. The election is at an advanced stage. The petitioner, in spite of rejection of objection by the Collector on 18th May 2010, filed present petition on 18th June 2010 i.e. after nearly about one month. The petitioner is guilty of laches. Apart from these facts, admittedly there are two resolutions passed by the said Vividh Karyakari Society Ltd; one in favour of respondent no.3 and another in favour of the petitioner. The respondent no.4 bank acted upon the resolution of the said Society wherein respondent no.3 was nominated as a delegate. The relevant question would be, which, out of the two resolutions, is the valid resolution. The validity of said two resolutions can be gone into by the Co-operative Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 91 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the validity of the said resolution along with the out-come of the election. Taking totality of the circumstances into consideration, I am of the opinion that the petition is devoid of any substance and deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (R.V.MORE, J.)