Anil Bhatiya v. The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai

21-AO-519-21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.519 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4331 OF 2021 Mr. Anil Bhatiya ...Appellant Vs The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai 'E' Ward

...Respondent

...

Mr. Tabish Mooman for the Appellant.

Mr. Rajendra Sirsikar for MCGM.

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

DATE : MARCH 17, 2022.

P.C. :

Appellant/Plaintiff was called upon to pull down th January, unauthorised construction described in Notice dated 20 2021 issued under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888. Notice reply was considered by the Designated Officer, st October, 2021 concluded that the plaintiff who by order dated 21 could not produce satisfactory and/or conclusive documentary evidence to prove that that notice structure was in existence prior to st April, 1962. While, the suit instituted by the datum line, i.e., 1 Shivgan 1/2

21-AO-519-21.odt appellant, inter-alia challenging the validity of notice and a 'Speaking Order', the learned Trial Court, declined ad-interim relief by observing that, plaintiff could not produce any document showing existence of notice structure prior to datum line. Even before this Court, plaintiff/appellant has not produced any document to show, either it was authorised construction or in existence prior to datum line.

Taking note of this fact, the order impugned requires no interference. Appeal is dismissed.

As the appeal itself is disposed of, nothing survives in the application therein and same is also disposed of. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) Shivgan 2/2