Bombay High Court
Shila Bharat Yadav And 5 Ors vs Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 4 December, 2018
Author: G.S. Patel
Bench: G.S. Patel
46-NMS4227-07+.DOC
Shephali
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4227 OF 2007
IN
SUIT NO. 82 OF 2008
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation ...Plaintif
Versus
Rizvi Education Society & Ors ...Defendants
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4364 OF 2008
IN
SUIT NO. 1878 OF 2006
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 4365 OF 2008
IN
SUIT NO. 166 OF 2008
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 2948 OF 2009
IN
SUIT NO. 166 OF 2008
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 3687 OF 2011
IN
SUIT NO. 1878 OF 2006
Page 1 of 5
4th December 2018
::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:15:59 :::
46-NMS4227-07+.DOC
WITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 795 OF 2013
IN
SUIT NO. 1878 OF 2006
Mr RY Sirsikar, with Mr Dadasaheb Shingade & Mr Javed Shaikh,
for MCGM.
Mr Akash Rebello, with Mr Prafull Salvi, i/b Ravi Thankaian, for
the Plaintiffs in Suit No. 1878 of 2006, for Defendants Nos. 1 to 8
in Suit No. 82 of 2008 and for Defendant No. 5 in Suit No. 166
of 2008.
Mr Sean Wassoodew, with Ms Shruti Bhavsar, for Defendant No. 6
in Suit No. 166 of 2008.
Ms Uma Palsule-Desai, AGP with Ms GR Shastri, AGP, for
Defendant No.4 in Suit No. 166 of 2008.
Mr J Jeejeebhoy, Amicus Curiae, present.
CORAM: G.S. PATEL, J
DATED: 4th December 2018
PC:-
1.There are three Suits and countless Notice of Motions, plus, for good measure, some Chamber Summonses. The property, perhaps fortunately, is one, although even this might be an oversimplification.
2. Suit No. 1878 of 2006 by the Rizvi Education Society seeks reliefs, inter alia, for possession and damages in regard to CTS No. 37 of Kurar village, Malad (East) with an area of 13788.7 sq mtrs.
Page 2 of 54th December 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:15:59 ::: 46-NMS4227-07+.DOC Suit No. 82 of 2008 is by the MCGM, and quite apart from the rare pleasure in seeing the MCGM as a plaintif rather than as a habitual defendant, this Suit covers the entirety of the property in the Rizvi Education Suit, i.e., CTS No. 37, and also a portion of CTS No. 3 (part), altogether 14047.19 sq mtrs. In addition, it relates to 1443.07 sq mtrs of Survey No. 5A Hissa No. 1. The MCGM runs the SK Patil Hospital on the land that it claims. The MCGM also contends that there were land acquisition proceedings resulting in an Award of 24th March 1975 in regard to Survey No. 5A.
3. The third Suit No. 166 of 2008 is filed by Shila Bharat Yadav, as the heir of one Bharat Yadav, saying that he owned the land bearing Survey No. 5A, Hissa No. 2A (CTS No. 3A and CTS No.
381) of Village Kurar, Malad (East), Mumbai, but contending that there was no valid acquisition or Award in respect of this land, and that the document dated 24th March 1975 was not an award at all but only an unsigned draft incapable of being given efect.
4. Mr Pai, for the Yadav family, also claims that the land covered by the Award was completely diferent and the State Government cannot acquire his clients' land on the strength of, or on the basis of, this Award.
5. Between these three Suits, there are very many Notices of Motion, and it is commonly agreed that the filings in these Motions are complete.
Page 3 of 54th December 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:15:59 ::: 46-NMS4227-07+.DOC
6. KR Shriram J previously requested Mr Jeejeebhoy to act as an amicus and he has prepared a most useful 10-page preliminary note outlining the various applications in each Suit.
7. There is no immediate cause for changing the present situation or status as it stands. Between the Yadavs and the State Government, there is a stay order operating against the State Government, which must continue. As regards MCGM, it is running and operating a hospital; and of course, it has no plans to peremptorily dispose of either the hospital or the lands.
8. Consequently, all these Notices of Motion will be taken up for hearing and final disposal in January 2019, since the hearing will take some time.
9. It appears that Mr Pai's clients have very recently filed a Chamber Summons to amend their Plaint. This is Chamber Summons No. 969 of 2017. Almost everybody opposes it. All Affidavits in Reply are to be filed and served in this Chamber Summons, if not already done, on or before 11th January 2019. Affidavit in Rejoinder, if any, is to be filed and served on or before 25th January 2019.
10. I am making it clear that the Chamber Summons will have to be heard first, because if it is allowed, it will undoubtedly have a bearing not only on three Suits, but also on Notices of Motion that are pending in these Suits. I will, therefore, list all pending Notices of Motion and the Chamber Summons for hearing and final disposal Page 4 of 5 4th December 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:15:59 ::: 46-NMS4227-07+.DOC on 30th January 2019, doing so on the basis that it is the Chamber Summons which is to be heard and decided first.
11. If the Chamber Summons is dismissed, the Motions will be taken up for hearing and final disposal. If not, further directions will follow.
12. On that date of that hearing, parties to coordinate between themselves and with Mr Jeejeebhoy to ensure that there is a consolidated compilation of all past orders, arranged chronologically with an index and a running pagination.
13. List the matters on 30th January 2019.
(G. S. PATEL, J) Page 5 of 5 4th December 2018 ::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 29/12/2018 06:15:59 :::