Crestline Developer Llp., v. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai

Digitally signed by TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date:

2026.01.28 11:07:01 +0530 TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 38451 OF 2025 Deepika Jitendra Bhaskar ... Petitioner vs.

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4795 OF 2025 Crestline Developer LLP ... Petitioner vs.

The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Others ... Respondents ...

Mr.Sanjiv Sawant with Mr.Samir Suryawanshi, Mr.Aadil Parasampuria, Mr.Pankaj Kode and Ms.Bhakti Wast for the Petitioner in WP (L) No. 4795 of 2025.

Dr. Suman Bhardwaj (appearing through VC) with Ms.Rutuja S. Gholap h/f. Mr. Harshal B. Khawale for the Petitioner in WP (L) No. 38451 of 2025.

Mr.Anoop Patil with Ms.Vaishali Ugale for the Respondent -BMC in WP No. 4795 of 2025.

Mr.Mayur Khandeparkar with Adv.Mangirishh Saraf and Adv.Joshua Samuel i/b. LJ Law for Respondent No. 5 in WP No. 4795 of 2025 and for Respondent No.2 in WP (L) No. 38451 of 2025.

Mr.R.R.Mishra for Respondent No.6 in WP No. 4795 of 2025- Society. Mr.Nishigandh Patil, AGP for Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 -State. Ms.Vaishali Ugale for the Respondent - BMC in WP (L) No. 38451 of 2025.

...1

Mrs.Gaurangi Patil, AGP for Respondent No. 5- State in WP (L) No. 38451 of 2025 Mr.Santosh Nachanekar (Head Clerk- Estate) present in the Court. ...

CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE : JANUARY 23, 2026 P.C:

1.

After lengthy submissions of the learned Advocates for the respective parties were heard on 14.01.2026, 19.01.2026, and today, the oral submissions have concluded. The Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 5 have tendered their written notes of submissions along with case law. The Municipal Corporation has also tendered its affidavit in reply along with documents.

2.

Mr. Patil, the learned Advocate for the Municipal Corporation, submits that the contents of the affidavit and the accompanying documents, may be treated as the written submissions of the Municipal Corporation and that the impugned order is self-explanatory, being lengthy and speaking.

...2

3.

The learned Advocate representing Respondent No. 6 Society has tendered an affidavit in reply and submits that the same may be considered as the Society's written notes of submissions. 4.

The learned Advocate representing the sole Petitioner in Writ Petition (L) No. 38451 of 2025, has canvassed his oral submissions. 5.

By consent of the parties, the matter is closed for judgment. (ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) ...3