Bombay High Court
Zulfikar Ali Abdul Rahim Shaikh vs The Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 17 October, 2022
Author: R.D. Dhanuka
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka
Digitally signed
by SUMEDH
SUMEDH NAMDEO
NAMDEO SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2022.10.21
10:02:02 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3003 OF 2022
Zulfikar Ali Abdul Rahim Shaikh .. Petitioner
v/s.
Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Amit Jamsadekar i/by Mr. Viquar Rajguru a/w Ms. Mahima
Sharma, Mr. Vignesh, M/s S. A. Legal Advocates and Associates, for the
petitioner.
Mr. Madhuri More i/by Mr. Sunil Sonawane, for the respondent Nos.1
to 4 - MCGM.
Mr. Karan Bhosale a/w. Mr. Aamir Kordia i/by Rajendra Rathod, for
respondent No.5
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATED : 17TH OCTOBER, 2022.
P.C. :
1. Mr. Bhosale, learned counsel for respondent No.5 invited our attention to the various documents annexed to the writ petition and to the affidavit in reply and also the applications made by the 1/4
5.wp.3003.22.doc sns petitioner and submitted that the petitioner has committed fraud upon the Court as well as upon the respondents.
2. By an order dated 14th September 2022, Municipal Corporation was not in a position to state whether any personal hearing was granted to the petitioner or not before issuing the certified list of tenants. We accordingly directed the Municipal Corporation to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner as well as to the respondent No.5 before reconsidering the certified list of tenants, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, within two weeks from today. The petitioner as well as the respondent No.5 are directed to remain present before the respondent No.2 on 25 th October 2022 at 11:00 a.m. The respondent No.2 shall decide the issue whether or not the name of the petitioner can be considered in the certified list of tenants in respect of the tenement claimed by the petitioner after hearing the petitioner as well as the respondent No.5. The respondent No.5 shall be at liberty to file a detailed reply supporting the case of the respondent No.5 and opposing the claim of the petitioner for adding the name of the the petitioner on the certified list of tenants.
3. The respondent No.2 shall pass an order within the prescribed 2/4
5.wp.3003.22.doc sns time and communicate the order passed by respondent No.2 to both the parties within three days from the passing of such order.
4. Mr. Bhosale, learned counsel for respondent No.5, on instructions, states that in respect of the Commercial Saleable area of 14,861 sq. ft. RERA carpet area from the ground floor to the 4th Floor in the said building that is under construction, his client has already issued a letter of allotment in favour of a third party. He has annexed the copy the letter of allotment dated 31 st August 2021 at 'Exhibit-I' at page No.509 of the reply filed by respondent No.5. Mr. Jamsadekar, learned counsel for the petitioner does not admit the authenticity of the copy of the letter of allotment annexed by learned counsel for respondent No.5.
5. We have recorded the statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 shall not enter into any agreements in furtherance to the letter of allotment in respect of the commercial premises of 3546.52 sq.ft. Carpet area on the ground floor with any party till 25th November 2022. If the order passed by respondent No.2 is against the respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to apply for the amendment to the petition. If the order is against the petitioner, the respondent No.5 shall not 3/4
5.wp.3003.22.doc sns enter into any further agreement without leave of the Court before the next date.
6. Place the matter as High on Board on 17th November 2022.
(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (R.D.DHANUKA, J.)
4/4
5.wp.3003.22.doc
sns