Bombay High Court
Dr. Sushil Tahiliani vs The Municipal Corporation Of Gr. Mumbai ... on 4 March, 2026
Author: S.M.Modak
Bench: M.S.Karnik, S.M.Modak
2026:BHC-OS:5671-DB
Ingale 39-wpL-4706-26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
URMILA
by URMILA
PRAMOD
INGALE
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
PRAMOD Date:
INGALE 2026.03.05
17:55:40
+0530
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 4706 OF 2026
Dr. Sushil Tahiliani ... Petitioner
Versus
The Municipal Corporation of
Greater Mumbai and ors. ... Respondents
****
Mr. Amogh Singh a/w Mr. Sarvesh K. Dixit, for the Petitioner.
Ms. S.V. Tondwalkar, for the Respondent-MCGM.
Ms.Manisha Gawade, AGP for Respondent-State.
****
CORAM : M.S.KARNIK &
S.M.MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 4th MARCH 2026 P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation and learned AGP for respondent-State.
2. The petitioner is a senior citizen aged 69 years and a Doctor of repute, serving and operating in the field of 'Dermatology' practising for over four decades in Mumbai. He is affiliated with esteemed institutions, including Hinduja Hospital at Mahim and Khar. The petitioner has recently shifted his residence to 29 th Road, Bandra West, Mumbai, to be in close proximity to his clinic 1 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/03/2026 20:39:46 ::: Ingale 39-wpL-4706-26.odt considering his advanced age. The petitioner has filed this petition as he along with other Society residents are facing continuous nuisance and violation of statutory norms due to the alleged unlawful conduct of respondent no. 4, a restaurant operating under the name 'M/s. Coconut Boy' located on the ground floor of the Epitome Building, at the junction of 29 th and 16th Road, Bandra West, Mumbai.
3. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the said restaurant regularly plays loud and blaring music on high-powered sound system both within its premises and outside, often beyond the permissible hours of 10:00 p.m. and even during daytime hours on weekends. The nuisance is further exacerbated by the installation of a tin sheet covering the outside portion of the premises, which amplifies the sound and creates a reverberating effect, disturbing the peace and comfort of residents in at least ten surrounding buildings. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is a continuous violation of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 framed under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, particularly, Rules 3 and 5 thereof. It is alleged that music levels regularly exceed the permissible decibel limits in a 2 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/03/2026 20:39:46 ::: Ingale 39-wpL-4706-26.odt residential area and often continues late into the night disrupting sleep, daily activities and the general wellbeing of the petitioner and other residents. The petitioner states that representations have been made to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) and to the Assistant Inspector General (AIG) of Police operating within the DCP Department dated 14/05/2025 and 10/11/2024 requesting the Police Authorities to redress the petitioner's predicaments. Also, the petitioner has made several complaints to respondent no. 1- the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to page 26 of the paper-book which is a complaint made to the Assistant Municipal Commissioner (H West Ward) stating therein the grievance of the petitioner that the restaurant is apparently using an adjoining part of the building compound which has been partially covered with thin plastic material. Loud live music is played from inside this area and this causes nuisance to many buildings around the restaurant.
5. In such view of the matter, we direct respondent no. 3- The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, H Ward, West to look into the 3 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/03/2026 20:39:46 ::: Ingale 39-wpL-4706-26.odt representations made by the petitioner and initiate appropriate action against the restaurant- respondent no. 4- M/s. Coconut Boy., if it is found to be non-compliant with the provisions of law. The petitioner is permitted to address a comprehensive representation to the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, H Ward West within a period of 1 week from today. The Assistant Municipal Commissioner, H Ward West to immediately look into the representation and initiate appropriate action in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that several representations have been made to the Bandra Police Station, one such representation is at page 23 of the paper-book.
Respondent no. 2- the Senior Inspector of Police, Bandra Police Station to look into the grievance of the petitioner and initiate appropriate action in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible if it is found that the restaurant is violating the noise pollution norms.
7. Our attention is invited to the decision of this Court in Jaago Nehru Nagar Residents Welfare Association through its President 4 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/03/2026 20:39:46 ::: Ingale 39-wpL-4706-26.odt Mr. Abhijit Kulkarni and another Vs. Commissioner of Police and others1. Since we have directed the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation, the representation may also be addressed to respondent no. 2 in consonance with the directions contained in paragraph 29 of the said decision i.e. Jaago Nehru Nagar Residents Welfare Association (supra).
8. On representation being so made, respondent no.2 shall ensure compliance with the directions contained in paragraph 29 of Jaago Nehru Nagar Residents Welfare Association (supra).
9. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
10. Liberty to apply in case of difficulty.
(S.M.MODAK, J.) (M.S.KARNIK, J.) 1 205 SCC OnLine Bom 146 5 ::: Uploaded on - 05/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 05/03/2026 20:39:46 :::