IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 907 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 18209 OF 2022
Jayashree Prakash Mahadik & Ors. …Appellants/Applicants
Versus
Om Prakash Gupta & Anr. …Respondents
a/w.
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 913 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 18251 OF 2022
Shakuntala Nandkumar Sangolkar & Ors. …Appellants/Applicants
Versus
Om Prakash Gupta & Anr. …Respondents
a/w.
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 914 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 18265 OF 2022
Varad Rajesh Kothari & Ors. …Appellants/Applicants
Versus
Om Prakash Gupta & Anr. …Respondents
Ms. Bhagyashri Mangale i/b. Mr. Jating S. Jamkhandi for the appellants/applicants.
Mr. Narendra V. Walawalkar, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms. Smita Tondwalkar for the respondent/MCGM.
Mr. Narayan Mathakar, Rent Supervisor M/E Ward present.
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI, J.
DATED: 14 February, 2023
ORAL ORDER
1. The order impugned in these appeals is an order dated 27 July, 2020 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court at Bombay whereby Notice of Motion No. 1766 of 2022 filed by the appellant/plaintiff in L.C. Suit No. 1138 of 2022 has been rejected.
2. Perusal of the record indicates that there was no ad-interim protection granted by this Court till date. When the proceedings were heard by this Court on 13 February, 2023 (yesterday) on urgent mentioning, the matter was adjourned for today to enable the learned advocate for the Municipal Corporation to take instructions.
3. I have heard Ms. Mangale, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Walawalkar, learned senior counsel along with Ms. Tondwalkar for the Municipal Corporation.
4. At the outset, it needs to be observed that the appellants/plaintiffs under the garb that they are project affected persons, are occupying tenements in question relying on allotment letters alleged to be issued by the Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation had categorically contended that the allotment letters and possession receipts produced by the appellants/plaintiffs were bogus and fabricated. The learned trial Judge on the materials as placed on record, has observed that such allotment letters are forged and fabricated documents. It is observed that the Assistant Engineer “E” Ward, at no time had issued such possession letters to the appellants, on the basis of which the appellants/plaintiffs claimed to be in the occupation of the project affected persons (PAP) tenements. It is on the basis of such bogus documents, the appellants/plaintiffs had initially obtained an ex-parte ad-interim injunction against the municipal corporation without proper service of the proceedings on the municipal corporation. This apart, the suit in question came to be filed not assailing the action on the part of the municipal corporation of any notice being issued under section 314 of the Municipal Corporation Act, but on purported oral threats. This assumes significance, as one of the observations as made in the impugned order, in my opinion, is quite serious, from which it prima facie appears that the officers of the municipal corporation are also misusing their position and/or are not appropriately controlling the fact-situation. The said observation reads thus:
“12. …… It is contention of the corporation that premises in Building No. 37 in Eversmile construction building has not been handed over to the Corporation for the purpose of project affected persons.”
5. Hence, what is disturbing is that not only there were tenements which may possibly be tenements which were under the control and authority of the municipal corporation, but there are certain other tenements, which ought to come to the municipal corporation and before they are so handed over to the municipal corporation, the same are being illegally dealt/allotted, when in fact they need to be in the pool of the municipal corporation. All these incidents depicts a sorry state of affairs, namely, as to how the municipal corporation could not be vigilant and permit illegal occupation of its tenements by such persons like the appellants/plaintiffs, who are in occupation of the premises, on forged and fabricated documents, and further, as to why timely steps were not taken by the municipal corporation in a manner known to law, to evict them/remedy the situation, more particularly, when such incidents are not new to the municipal corporation and its officers. Also in the past, similar illegalities had occurred with PAP tenements in control of the municipal corporation, were occupied illegally and on false documents, when the proceedings had reached this Court. Such incidents/illegality amounts to nothing but usurption of public largesse in a manner contrary to law.
6. Mr. Walawalkar, in fairness, has drawn the Court’s attention to an order dated 5 May, 2017 in Jayprakash Patru Chouhan & Ors. vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & A
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.