← Library
Bombay High CourtAO/551/2015disposed off

Jasvindersingh Jagjitsingh v. Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai

2015-03-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice K.K. Tated2 pages

5863.15-ao FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION.

APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO.5863 OF 2015 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO.5864 OF 2015 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. M. M. Vashi, Senior Advocate i/b. M. P. Vashi for the Appellant Mr. A. K. Nandanwar for the Respondent Municipal Corporation CORAM : K. K. TATED, J.

DATE : MARCH 30, 2015 P.C.:

1.

Heard. By this appeal, the Plaintiff challenges the order dated 26/02/2015 passed by the Trial Court declining to grant ad-interim relief in terms of draft Notice of Motion.

2.

This matter was on board before this court on 09/03/2015. At that time, this court granted 2 weeks time to the Respondent Corporation to file an Affidavit-in-Reply with copy to other side. The learned counsel for the Respondent submits that he does not have any instructions for filing an Affidavit-in-Reply.

3.

The learned senior counsel for the Appellant submits that in view of paragraph 4 of the order dated 09/03/2015 this Hon'ble Court be pleased to Basavraj G Patil 1/2

5863.15-ao direct the Trial Court to decide the Notice of Motion as early as possible.

4.

Considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the Appellant, the impugned order and the averments made in the Application, following order is passed:

a) The Respondent Corporation is directed to file their Affidavit-in-Reply in the draft Notice of Motion within 3 weeks from today in the Trial Court.

b) Liberty granted to the Appellant Plaintiff to file their rejoinder within 1 week thereafter. c) Hearing of the Notice of Motion is expedited. d) Till decision of the Notice of Motion, parties are directed to maintain status-quo.

e) It is made clear that the Appellant cannot carry on any business in the stall.

f) Appeal from Order stands disposed of accordingly.

g) In view thereof, Civil application does not survives. Same stands dismissed.

JUDGE Basavraj G Patil 2/2