Sandhya Pravin Fagnia v. The Chief Officer, M.B.R. And R.Board, Mhada And 4 ORS.

BDPSPS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Bharat Dasharath Pandit Bharat Dasharath Pandit Date: 2018.10.11 18:03:51 +0530 WRIT PETITION (L) NO.3461 OF 2018 Sandhya Pravin Fagnia Through her constituted Attorney Priyank Pravin Fagnia ..Petitioner

Versus

The Chief Officer, M.B.R. Board, MHADA and Others ..Respondents Mr. Nilesh Gala I/b M/s. Law Square for the Petitioner. Mr. Prabhakar Jadhav I/b Mr. V.P. Sawant for Respondent Nos. 1 and 4.

Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar alongwith Mr. Vikram Grewal I/b Ms. Jacinta D'Silva for Respondent No.2.

Mr. G.S. Hegde alongwith Mr. S.C. Singh for Respondent No.3. Ms. Trupti Puranik for Respondent No.5-MCGM.

Mr. Juned Alam Khan, partner of Respondent No.3, present. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI & M. S. KARNIK, JJ.

DATE: 9th OCTOBER, 2018 P.C.:- 1] After arguing the matter at some length, when learned Counsel for Respondent-Society and Respondent-Developer made a categorical statement that Petitioner would be provided more area than one which is presently in his occupation and out of the said area 70% would be on the ground floor and remaining 30% would be on the 1/3

first floor with internal staircase and that the Petitioner would be paid monthly compensation of Rs 40,000/- as is being paid to the other similarly situated members, learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the Petition.

2] We therefore record the statement on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 that the Petitioner would be given 412 sq.ft. area in the reconstructed premises in lieu of his existing area of 340 sq.ft. and that the 70% of the area would be on the ground floor and 30% of the area would be on the first floor with internal staircase and further that the Petitioner would be provided monthly compensation of Rs 40,000/- till completion of the project.

3] Learned Counsel for the Developer, on instructions, further states that on Petitioner approaching the Developer, the registered agreement would be executed within a period of one week. The said statement is treated as an undertaking to this Court. 4] In the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct 2/3

Respondent/MHADA not to forcibly evict the Petitioner for a period of two weeks from today.

5] Petition is accordingly disposed of as withdrawn in the aforesaid terms.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.) 3/3