THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI vs M/S. RUSCO PHARMA PVT LTD AND ANR.

Court
Bombay High Court
Case type
Civil Application In First Appeal
Decided on
02-04-2026
<div> <b>2026:BHC-AS:15989</b><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY<br /> CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18596 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3725 OF 2019<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3058 OF 2018<br /> WITH <br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3057 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Pankaj Mehta &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8362 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3144 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3175 OF 2018<br /> WITH <br /> CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO.13669 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3143 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Casa Paradox Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8367 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3162 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3160 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.45 OF 2025<br /> 1 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Eicher Goodearth Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8375 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.48 OF 2025<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3171 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.47 OF 2025<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3170 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Vinubhai Chandulal Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8381 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3167 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.46 OF 2025<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3166 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Tristar Interior Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8393 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.43 OF 2025<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3151 OF 2018<br /> 2 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3153 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3152 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Capelin Investment And</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Trading Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.8513 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.44 OF 2025<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3128 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3131 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3129 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3130 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Rusco Pharma Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.12853 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3125 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3127 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3124 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Aamore-Per-La-Casa &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> 3 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17736 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3157 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3156 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Zahir Zenuddin Marchant</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondent</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17744 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3138 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3137 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Biharilal Uddhavdas Wadhwa &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17749 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3148 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3147 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Satish Shah &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17755 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3154 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3155 OF 2018<br /> 4 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Deluxe Polymers Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Anr.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17763 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3041 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3040 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Manju Singhvi</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondent</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17767 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3141 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3142 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Babulal P. Bohra &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.17998 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3043 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3044 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Rohit Gupta &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> 5 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18001 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3055 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3056 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Shimera Project Lighting &amp; Anr</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>.</td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18006 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3052 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3051 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Venus Wire Industries</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Anr.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18010 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3046 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3045 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Leonard Holding and</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Trading Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Anr.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18087 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> 6 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3039 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3038 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Design Multiples &amp; Anr.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18095 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3048 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3047 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Bihar Supply Company &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18101 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3049 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3050 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Shree Ganesh Knitting</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>and Manufacturing Mills &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.18594 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3146 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3145 OF 2018<br /> 7 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Delux Polymers Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.19564 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3165 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3164 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Comrade Lease Finvest</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Pvt. Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.19600 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3037 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3036 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sanjay Mahendra Chopra &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.20109 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3139 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3140 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Vitesse Limited &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> 8 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> WITH<br /> FIRST APPEAL (ST) NO.24159 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3177 OF 2018<br /> WITH<br /> CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3176 OF 2018<br /></div><table><thead><tr><th>The Municipal Corporation</th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th><th></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>of Greater Mumbai</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Appellant/Applicant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Versus</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>M/s. Elegant Marbles and</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Grani Industries Ltd. &amp; Ors.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>...Respondents</td></tr></tbody></table><div><br /> Mr. Narendra Walavalkar, Sr. Adovate a/w. Mr. Pradeep M. Patil, Ms.<br /> Pallavi Khale i/b. Ms. Komal Punjabi for Appellant/BMC.<br /> Mr.Rajesh Rathod, Assistant Engineer Building and Factory G/Sourth<br /> Ward present.<br /> Mr. Archit Jayakar a/w. Ms. Pooja Yadav i/b. Jayakar &amp; Partners for<br /> Respondent No.1 in CAF/3160/2018 in FAST/8367/2018 and<br /> CAF/3151/2018 in FAST/8393/2018.<br /> Mr. Rahul Soman a/w. Mr. Suyash More i/b. Mr. Makarant Raut for<br /> Applicant in CA/77/2019 in for Respondent No.7 in FAST/19600/2018.<br /> Mr. Shobhit Shukla a/w. Ms. Priti Thakur for Respondent in<br /> FAST/19564/2018, FAST/18594/2018, FAST/24159/2018,<br /> FAST/17755/2018.<br /> Mr. Vipul Shukla i/b. Mr. Jayesh Vyas for Respondents in<br /> FAST/17736/2018, CAF/3156/2018 &amp; CAF/3157/2018.<br /> Mrs. Yasmin Bhansali a/w. Ms. Prabjyot Kaur Kler &amp; Ms. Shazia Sameen<br /> i/b. Yasmin Bhansali &amp; Co. for Respondent No.1 in FAST/18001/2018 &amp;<br /> CAF/3055/2018.<br /> Mr. Yash Sinha i/b. Mr. Tushar Goradia for Respondents in<br /> CAF/3040/2018 in FAST/1763/2018.<br /> Mr. Rajesh S. Maravoor i/b. Maravoor Wamorkar &amp; Co. for Respondents<br /> in FAST/18596/2018, FAST/8362/2018, FAST/17744/2018,<br /> 9 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> FAST/17749/2018, FAST/17998/2018, FAST/18006/2018,<br /> FAST/18010/2018, FAST/18087/2018 &amp; FAST/18095/2018.<br /> Ms. Kinjal Kaddad a/w. Mr. Jayesh R. Vyas for Respondents in<br /> FAST/17736/218 &amp; CAF/3157/2018 &amp; CAF/3156/2018.<br /> _____________________________________________________<br /> <br /> CORAM : JITENDRA JAIN, J.<br /> DATE : 2 APRIL 2026<br /> JUDGMENT :<br /> <br /> 1. This is a group of around 26 Civil Applications filed by the<br /> Corporation for condoning the delay ranging from more than 1 year and<br /> close to 9 years approximately. By consent, Civil Application No. 3057 of<br /> 2018 filed in FA(ST) No. 18596 of 2018 is taken as lead matter, since<br /> reasons in all these civil applications for explaining delay as per all the<br /> counsel is more or less similar. <br /> 2. This application is filed by the Corporation to challenge the order<br /> th<br /> passed on 12 October, 2009 by the City Civil Court, Mumbai whereby<br /> challenge to notice under section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal<br /> Corporation Act, 1888 for demolition of illegal structure/s was upheld,<br /> th<br /> by quashing the notice dated 26 April, 2005.<br /> 3. As per Section 15 of the Bombay City Civil Court Act, 1948,<br /> appeal had to be filed within 30 days thereof. However, the appeal has<br /> th<br /> been filed on 29 June, 2018. This has resulted into delay of 8 years<br /> 230 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, present civil application for<br /> condoning the delay.<br /> 4. I have heard learned senior counsel for the applicant-Corporation<br /> and learned counsel for the respondents.<br /> 10 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> 5. In the civil application, reasons for the delay is mentioned in<br /> paragraph 5. Briefly, the reason is that in December, 2017 a mishap took<br /> place at Kamla Mills Compound in which innocent young lives were<br /> lost. This incident was a wake-up call for the Corporation and the<br /> applicant-Corporation immediately thereafter initiated enquiry into all<br /> the establishments where illegalities were committed and an action was<br /> taken by the Corporation. During this enquiry and investigation, the<br /> applicant-Corporation realized that, various orders were passed by the<br /> City Civil Court, Mumbai quashing the demolition notice which were in<br /> fact not challenged in appeal and much time had lapsed thereafter. In<br /> the application it is stated that the concerned officers of the Corporation<br /> attending the matters did not inform the progress of the matters nor did<br /> they inform about the judgment being passed against the applicant-<br /> Corporation. In my view, this itself is very shocking reason which shows<br /> more than what the eyes can meet.<br /> 6. At this stage, on a query raised by this court, the learned senior<br /> counsel for the Corporation has produced before me, documents<br /> showing action initiated against these officers in the year 2018. I hope<br /> that the action initiated in the year 2018, by now has culminated into<br /> passing of the appropriate orders after conducting departmental<br /> enquiries and if not then it is a very sorry state of affairs that till today<br /> after close to 8 years these actions are only show-off. In such a case, the<br /> Corporation is directed to close the proceedings within 4 months from<br /> today and a report of the action taken should be filed in this Court. The<br /> action should not be restricted against these officers but also against<br /> their superiors because it was the duty of the superiors to have<br /> supervised the progress which prima facie appears to have been not<br /> carried out, atleast nothing is stated in affidavit. Only some officers<br /> 11 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> cannot be made scapegoat and others go untouched.<br /> 7. I do not wish to reproduce paragraph 5 but I have summarized<br /> the contents of the said paragraph above. The Corporation has also filed<br /> th<br /> an additional affidavit of Smt. Swapnaja Kshirsagar affirmed on 30<br /> March, 2026, wherein what was stated in the original affidavit has been<br /> reiterated.<br /> 8. The issue before me is whether there is a “sufficient cause” to<br /> condone the delay. Admittedly, except alleging in-action on the part of<br /> the officers of the Corporation which came to light after the incident of<br /> Kamla Mill Compound, nothing else has been asserted. Whether a<br /> subsequent event would constitute “sufficient cause” has to be<br /> examined. In my view, subsequent event in another matter would not<br /> entitle a party to challenge an order after a period of 8 years and 230<br /> days. The reason for not filing the appeal as per the affidavit is that the<br /> concerned officers did not inform the progress of the matter and<br /> judgment of the City Civil Court, Mumbai. This is an internal matter of<br /> the Corporation for which the sword of the litigation cannot be left<br /> hanging for an indefinite period over a party who had succeeded in the<br /> Court unless collusion is averred which in the affidavit is not. The<br /> Corporation has taken action against the concerned officers as observed<br /> by me above, but still that would not entitle the Corporation to contend<br /> that there was “sufficient cause”. Between the Corporation and the<br /> party before me, the lis has come to an end on the expiry of the<br /> limitation period by not challenging the impugned order. <br /> 9. Nothing has been shown to me except show cause notice issued<br /> in the year 2018 against these officers. If the Corporation was so serious<br /> then by now serious and stern action should have been initiated against<br /> 12 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> not only all the officers who did not report the progress but also their<br /> superiors. The action should be pre-emptive and not post such an<br /> untoward incident. We cannot stop by making a show of issuing show –<br /> cause notice to seek sympathy of the Court for condoning the delay but<br /> a stern action ought to have been taken which would have acted as<br /> deterrent but unfortunately we forget the incidents too soon and show<br /> action remains on table for long. This Court cannot be used as a tool for<br /> inaction and dereliction of duty by the officers of the Corporation. The<br /> fact of so many matters were not reported is a serious concern for<br /> introspection in the working of the World’s largest Corporation.<br /> 10. Therefore, I am of the view that, the reasons given in the<br /> application, namely the incident of Kamla Mill Compound and the<br /> officers not informing their superiors about the progress of the matter<br /> would not constitute “sufficient cause”. The Corporation should have an<br /> inbuilt system whereby the progress of the litigation pending before<br /> various courts should be monitored by the superiors either by calling<br /> the junior officers or by making certain notings in the system which will<br /> get reflected on the system of the superiors. Such a thing should not<br /> happen in future. It is the duty of the superiors to seek report about the<br /> progress of matters. In my view, if reasons are correct then superiors are<br /> equally responsible for dereliction in carrying out their duties. <br /> 11. The issue whether subsequent incident or event would entitle a<br /> litigant to challenge after so many years had come up for consideration<br /> before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Development<br /> 1<br /> Authority Vs. Tejpal and Others . The Hon’ble Supreme Court has<br /> discussed this issue at length from paragraphs 37 to 47. Though, the<br /> said decision is with respect to change in law, on account of subsequent,<br /> 1 (2024) 7 SCC 433<br /> 13 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> Supreme Court decision relating to land acquisition, in my view, it<br /> applies with greater force in the present matter where the subsequent<br /> event is a manmade disaster, on account of inaction by the concerned<br /> local authorities. Therefore, in my view, such a long delay cannot be<br /> condoned, based on a subsequent incident, though, the Corporation has<br /> taken a show off remedial action.<br /> 12. However, at the same time, if there are illegalities committed by<br /> violating the law, then merely because for the reasons stated above, the<br /> Corporation did not file the appeal in time, should not give an incentive<br /> to the persons committing such illegalities and allow them to go<br /> unnoticed and unpunished due to inaction of officers for reasons best<br /> known to all. It is also important to note that the notice which was<br /> challenged before the City Civil Court, Mumbai was of the year 2005<br /> and now we are in the year 2026. Much water must have flown in last<br /> two decades, which may result into hearing this appeal as an academic<br /> exercise after delay of filing of more than 8 years. This is so because the<br /> illegalities alleged by the Corporation may have either been removed on<br /> account of lapse of time or may have changed on account of various<br /> other factors. Therefore, a fresh beginning can always be made in the<br /> larger interest of the safety of the society and for ensuring that laws of<br /> this country does not remain on paper but are complied with by one<br /> and all.<br /> 13. Therefore, to balance the equity and to ensure that illegality is<br /> not gone unpunished, liberty is given to the Corporation to carry out<br /> fresh inspection and initiate fresh action, in accordance with law and if<br /> permissible, to ascertain whether any illegalities are committed on such<br /> inspection as of today. Such fresh cause of action would be, of course, in<br /> th<br /> accordance with law and the impugned order dated 12 October, 2009<br /> 14 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> would not come in the way of the Corporation since the same is based<br /> on illegalities noticed in the year 2005. If such an action is initiated,<br /> then the noticee would be entitled to raise all defences available to<br /> them in law. All contentions of all the parties are kept open since I have<br /> not opined on merits, in this present order. This course of action is<br /> acceptable to the Corporation as very fairly stated by learned senior<br /> counsel but is not acceptable to the respondents for the reasons best<br /> known to them when they don’t have to fear if they have not committed<br /> any illegalities and the doors of the Court are always open if they find<br /> action of the Corporation is not in accordance with law. Therefore, the<br /> present order is not passed on concession, but in accordance with the<br /> conscious of this Court and in accordance with the oath which this<br /> Court has taken to protect the Constitution and law of the land. This<br /> Court will be failing in its duty and oath if the illegalities and inaction of<br /> officers goes unchecked and unpunished.<br /> 14. In view of above, the delay in filing the appeal is not condoned.<br /> Civil Application No. 3057 of 2018 is dismissed. Consequently, appeals<br /> stands dismissed and civil applications, if any, does not survive.<br /> 15. Before parting, the Corporation to file a report of action taken<br /> pursuant to show cause notices of the year 2018 with this Court on or<br /> th<br /> before 12 August, 2026, on which day the Corporation will apprise the<br /> progress made on the proceedings pursuant to the said show cause<br /> notices, if the same has not culminated in the order. The progress report<br /> should indicate the action taken against not only the noticee’s but also<br /> against their superiors for dereliction of their duty and also explanation<br /> for not concluding the show cause notice till today, if not concluded.<br /> 16. The show cause notice shown by the learned counsel is returned<br /> 15 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> back in the Court. The Court expects that the Corporation will take<br /> strict action against all the persons found guilty which is alleged in the<br /> show cause notice. If on enquiries and investigation it is found that<br /> private persons have colluded with officers and are also involved then,<br /> the Corporation should take appropriate action including criminal<br /> action against the private persons, and the police authorities are<br /> directed to take immediate action against them, by lodging FIR at the<br /> behest of the Corporation. It is the duty of all the machineries of the<br /> State to co-ordinate and work together at a lightning speed to bring all<br /> the guilty persons to be booked in accordance with law.<br /> 17. Insofar as, all the other civil applications are concerned, the<br /> reasons given by me while disposing the Civil Application No. 3057 of<br /> 2018 would be equally applicable to all these civil applications and,<br /> therefore, adopting the same reasoning and by giving the same liberty,<br /> all the civil applications for condoning the delay are dismissed.<br /> Consequently, all the appeals and civil applications are also dismissed.<br /> 18. It is made clear that the above/direction is only against the issue<br /> of officers not reporting the progress and informing about the adverse<br /> orders against the Corporation. I am not in this matter directly<br /> concerned with the untoward incident at Kamla Mill Compound for<br /> which the State must have taken appropriate action.<br /> 19. Citizens of Commercial Capital of the Country have high<br /> expectations from the newly appointed Administrator of the<br /> Corporation, who has created history and I hope the Administrator<br /> would live upto the expectations and not let citizens down but would<br /> make us all proud. <br /> 16 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b><br /><br /> S. Bang 901-FA(ST).18596.2018.doc<br /> <br /> 20. Registry to send a copy of this order to the Commissioner of the<br /> Corporation and to the Chief Legal Officer of the Corporation. <br /> 21. All Civil Applications and Appeals are disposed of. <br /> th<br /> 22. List these matter on 13 August, 2026 for reporting “compliance”.<br /> [ JITENDRA JAIN, J. ]<br /> SAYYED<br /> SAEED<br /> ALI<br /> AHMED<br /> ALI<br /> Digitally signed<br /> by SAYYED<br /> SAEED ALI<br /> AHMED ALI<br /> Date:<br /> 2026.04.04<br /> 15:21:37 +0530<br /> 17 of 17<br /> <b><i>::: Uploaded on - 04/04/2026</i></b> <b><i>::: Downloaded on - 04/04/2026 16:03:36 :::</i></b></div>