Mrs. Bayabai Ramu Gungune v. State Of Maharashtra Through Urban Development Dept. And ORS

8.WPNo.119052022(C).doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11905 OF 2022 Bayabai Ramu Gungune ...

Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...

Respondents Mr. Kamlesh S. Mishra, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent No.1 to 6/State. Mr. Sharad T. Bhosale h/f. Mr. Dilip Bodake, Advocate for Respondent No.7.

Mr. Azimuddin N. Kazi a/w. Adv. Rizwan Khan i/b. N. N. Kazi & Associates, Advocate for Respondent Nos.9 & 11. CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA & S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATED : DECEMBER 9, 2022 P.C.

1.

We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and respondents.

2.

This is the third writ petition fled by the petitioner in respect of the same construction. Writ Petition bearing No.2663 of 2018 was fled by the same petitioner against the same respondents with regard to the alleged unauthorized construction. Under an order dated 31st August 2018, the said writ petition is disposed of on the ground that the issue raised cannot be addressed in the frst writ petition. Thereafter another Writ Petition bearing No. 231 of 2020 Gaikwad RD 1/2

8.WPNo.119052022(C).doc was fled. The same is disposed of under an order dated 16th January 2022. Paragraph Nos.3 and 4 of the said order reads thus :

"3.

The learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner admits that the subject matter of Writ Petition No. 2663 of 2018 and the above Writ Petition are same. The Civil Suit which was fled by Respondent Nos.4 to 7, is pending till date. In view thereof, the question of granting any relief to the Petitioner, who has tried to once again take a chance before this Court by fling the above Writ Petition, does not arise at all. The Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly.

4. The learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner states that since the Writ Petition is dismissed, the Petitioner be allowed to fle an intervention application in the Civil Suit pending before the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhiwandi. The Petitioner is always at liberty to intervene in the Civil Suit by fling an intervention Application. The Intervention Application, if fled, shall be decided by the civil Judge, Junior Division, Bhiwandi on its own merits uninfluenced by this order.2 3.

Now, this third petition is fled by the same party and with regard to the same relief.

4.

Multiple petitions cannot be entered for the same parties. This Court has already observed that the petition cannot be entertained. The Court has passed an order in the earlier petition granting liberty to the petitioner to fle application in the pending civil suit.

5.

In light of the orders passed earlier by this Court, no further orders can be passed.

6.

The writ petition petition is disposed of.

(S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2022.12.12 14:47:01 +0530 Gaikwad RD 2/2 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD