Mr. Dilip Balkrishna Cowley v. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.

Mr. Dilip Balkrishna Cowley...Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. ......Respondents Mr. A.S. Khandeparkar with Mr. Anilkumar Joshi for the petitioner. Mrs. A.K. Savla for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. D.H. Mehta i/b. Pravin Mehta & Mithi & Co., for respondent Nos.3 to 6. CORAM: F.I.F.I.F.I. REBELLO REBELLO &&& REBELLO ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE: 18TH SEPTEMBER 2006 P.C. .

Rule. Heard forthwith. It is the case of the petitioners that they have sold 50% of Plot No.440 CTS Nos.1197 and 1197/1 in favour of Respondent Nos. 3 to 6. It is their grievance that the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 while submitting their plan for development have shown part of the R.G. area into their plot which is numbered as 440/B for the sake of convenience.

Considering that we direct Respondent No..2 to hear the petitioner and respondents 4 to 6 and after examining the sale deed in the event any part of the developed plot NO.440/A shows R.G. area in Plot No.440/B then to withdraw the I.O.D. until such period as the R.G. area is changed and shown in Plot No.440/A. The entire action to be completed within four weeks from today. In the meantime Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 not to proceed with the construction. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed off. (F.I. REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO, J) (ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA,J). V. MOHTA,J). ANOOP V. MOHTA,J).