Smt.. Jamnaben Nandlal Bhavsar v. State Of Mharashtra And 7 ORS.

2023:BHC-OS:8885-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.25 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2450 OF 2010 Smt. Jamnaben Nandlal Bhavsar Aged : 65 years, occ. Housewife, Indian Inhabitant, residing at Present Room No.32, 2nd Floor, Shiv Sadan Building No.12, Navi Wadi, D.S.A. Lane, Mumbai-400 002.

...

Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Maharashtra Mantralaya, through Government Pleader High Court, Bombay

2. Hon'ble State Minister for Mumbai Urban Housing Area And Development HON Minister, State of Maharashtra Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 021.

3. Chief Offcer, Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (MHADA) Grahnirman Bhavan, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051.

4. Executive Engineer 'C-3' Ward, Chandanwadi, Mumbai-400 002

5. Secretary Shree Maheshwari CHS Ltd.

Chowpatty Terrace Building, 4th Floor, Morvi Lane, Cream Centre, Chowpatty, Mumbai-400 007

6. Director Establishment Building & Project (E.S.& P.) 1/3

Municipal Commissioner for Greater Mumbai MCGM, VT, Opp. CST Station Fort, Mumbai-400 001.

7. Mumbai Corporation for Greater Mumbai Mahapalika Marg, Opp. C.S.T. Station, Fort, Mumbai-400 001.

8. Vardhaman Developers Ltd.

Company registered under Indian Companies Act having Offce at 58/64, Hari Chambers, First Floor, Shahid Bhagatsingh Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 001.

...

Respondents *** None for the Petitioner.

Mr. L.T. Satelkar, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Viraj Jadhav i/b Reena Salunkhe for Respondent No.8. *** CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.

DATE : 22 AUGUST 2023 P.C.

.

Learned Counsel for Respondent No.8 is present. None present for the Petitioner, who is dead as has been informed by his son on 24 June 2022. On that day, an opportunity was granted to the son of the Petitioner to address the Court. After 24 June 2022, neither son of the Petitioner nor anybody on his behalf appeared before the Court. Even on 7 August 2023, son of the deceased Petitioner or any other legal representative of 2/3

the deceased Petitioner was not present before the Court. Therefore, this Court had granted further opportunity in the matter to the legal representatives of the Petitioner. Today, again, no legal representatives of the Petitioner is present before the Court. It is obvious that legal representatives of the Petitioner in the Petition does not wish to prosecute as legal representative of the deceased. The Petition, therefore, abates and is disposed of accordingly. (FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.) 3/3