NITIN JAMDAR, AMIT BORKAR
Ashok Babulal Avasthi – Appellant
Versus
Munna Nizamuddin Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nitin Jamdar, J.
In a suit filed by the Respondent- Licensee against the Municipal Corporation to restrain it from demolishing the Property, the Petitioner- Owner of the suit property, the Landlord, sought to implead himself as a party defendant. The trial court rejected the application. Being aggrieved, the Owner filed this writ petition. The learned Single Judge opined that there is a divergence of views taken by the single judges of this Court as to whether the owner of the premises is a necessary or a proper party in such proceedings and referred the matter for consideration by the learned Chief Justice for the constitution of a larger bench to resolve the conflict. Accordingly, the Reference is placed before us.
2. To understand the context in which the question came to be referred to the larger bench, a few basic facts of this case need to be noted. The suit property, measuring approximately 1200 sq.ft., is on the ground floor of Awasthi Estate, situated on Bal Bhat Road, Goregaon (East), Mumbai. The Respondent No.1 is on the premises as a Licensee. According to Respondent No.1, the officers of Respondent No.2- Municipal Corporation threatened to remove the structure,
Aliji Momonji & Co. v. Lalji Mavji
Anil Kumar Singh v. Shivnath Mishra [(1995) 3 SCC 147]
Kamleshkumar Ishwardas Patel v. Union of India
M/s.Aliji Momonji & Co. v. Lalji Mavji
Mohamed Hussain Gulam Ali Shariffi v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay
New Redbank Tea Co.(P) Ltd. v. Kumkum Mittal [(1994) 1 SCC 402]
Ramesh Hirachand Kundanmal v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.