ROHIT B. DEO AND MRS. VRUSHALI v. JOSHI, J J. DATED
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ROHIT B DEO, VRUSHALI V JOSHI
Provisions considered
Judgment
Mr. S. M. Vaishnav, Advocate for the applicants/petitioners Mrs. K. R. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent 1 Mr. J. B. Kasat, Advocate for respondents 2 to 4 Mr. F. T. Mirza, Advocate for respondent 5 CORAM : ROHIT B. DEO AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J J. DATED : 13-3 -202 3 By this application, the petitioners are seeking injunction restraining respondent 5 from proceeding with the construction.
The civil application is sworn on 8-6-2020. Learned counsel for respondent 5 Mr. Mirza states that the construction is complete. We accept the statement. Nothing survives in this application. It is disposed
of. Writ Petition No. 560 of 2021
It appears that the petitioners have also preferred an appeal under Section 47 of the Maharashtra Regional 2 w.p. 560.2021.odt and Town Planning Act, 1966 and Section 451 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 before the State Government. We request learned counsel Mr. Vaishnav to apprise us the status of the pending appeal.
Stand over to 24-3-2023. (Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) (Rohit B. Deo, J.) wasnik YUVRAJ WASNIK Signing Date:14.03.2023 10:20
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.