✦ Bombay High Court · 16 Jul 2009

Sou Savita Shirish Rasne v. Sou Pramila Prabhakar Mohite & Ors.

Civil Application No. 643 of 2009R P SONDURBALDOTA

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 22. Respondents have filed affidavit in reply opposing the allegations made against them. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that once the appeal is disposed off and the rights of the parties are confirmed, the applicant will be able to take steps atleast as regards…

Judgment

Mr.Ajay S.Gadkari,, Advocate for applicant. Ms.Gouri Godse, Advocate for respondents. Coram : SMT.R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 16th July, 2009 P.C.

1.

This civil application is taken out for early hearing of the first appeal on the ground that during the pendency of the appeal, the Pune Municipal Corporation has issued notice under Section 268(1) of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 that the building in which the parties are residing is in dilapidated condition and hence dangerous for residence. Mr.Gadkari submits that because of non co- operative attitude of respondents, it has become difficult for the applicant to take any steps towards repairs of the structure. The photographs annexed to the application do indicate that the premises are old and dilapidated condition. Ms.Gadkari has also produced copy of notice dated 19th June 2009 addressed to all the three parties to the proceedings informing them that the building is old and dilapidated and has not been maintained properly and it has become dangerous for occupation. 2

2.

Respondents have filed affidavit in reply opposing the allegations made against them. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that once the appeal is disposed off and the rights of the parties are confirmed, the applicant will be able to take steps atleast as regards the premises in her occupation. Considering the issuance of notice by Pune Municipal Corporation and the condition of the building, the civil application for early hearing is allowed in terms of prayers clause (a) and (b). The appeal be placed on board for final hearing. (Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota,J)

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 — s. 268(1).

Which court decided this case, and when?

Bombay High Court, on 16 Jul 2009. The bench was R P SONDURBALDOTA.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Application No. 643 of 2009). ← Search more judgments