Ashwin Gada vs M/S. Milan Associates And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 15501 Bom

Bombay High Court

Ashwin Gada vs M/S. Milan Associates And Others on 4 June, 2024

Diksha Rane                                       13. ao 396-24.doc




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.396/2024

                                   WITH

               INTERIM APPLICATION ST.NO.15489/2024
                                in
                  APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.396/2024

ASHWIN GADA                              ..APPELLANT

              VS.

M/S. MILAN ASSOCIATES & ORS. ..RESPONDENTS
                         ------------
Adv. Ram Upadhyay a/w. Adv. Anuj Pande                                i/b.   Law
Competere Consultus for appellant.

Adv. Rahul P. Raut for respondent nos.1 to 5.

Adv. S. S. Nikam for respondent nos. 6 to 14.
                          ------------

                             CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

                             DATE    : JUNE 4, 2024.
                                      (VACATION COURT)
P.C. :

1. This appeal from order challenges an order dated

22/5/2024 passed by the trial Court on Exhibit '5' in R.C.S.

No.187/2024.

2. The appellant has filed the suit challenging a notice

issued under Section 268 of the Maharashtra Municipal

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

Corporation Act. The trial Court by its order dated 22/5/2024

has refused to grant any interim protection to the appellant.

Hence, the present appeal from order is filed by the

appellant.

3. It is an admitted position that the building is more than

40 years old and consists of ground plus three floors. On the

ground floor, there are commercial premises. The present

appellant is a person to whom the commercial premises

belong. There is no dispute that the residential units have

already been vacated.

4. Mr.Nikam appearing for the respondent nos.6 to 14

submits that certain parts of the building has already been

demolished including the premises which were belonging to

the appellant.

5. Mr. Upadhyay appearing for the appellant tenders a

copy of photographs whereby the parts of commercial

premises have been demolished. The photographs are taken

on record and for ease of reference the same are

reproduced hereinbelow:-

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

Diksha Rane 13. ao 396-24.doc

6. The counsels appearing for the respondent nos.1 to 5

and for the respondent nos.6 to 14 have tendered their

reply and the copies of the same has also been furnished to

Mr. Upadhyay.

7. Mr.Nikam submits that the developer is also ready to

sign PAAA agreement with the appellant on the same

condition as it has been done with the residential units and

as per the rules prevailed.

8. Taking into consideration the above facts and the ratio

laid down by Division Bench of this Court, in the judgment of

Mahendra Shah vs. M.C.G.M., reported in (2019) 5 Bom

CR 451, it is made clear that interim protection, if any

granted to the appellant, is hereby vacated.

9. Stand over to 11/6/2024.

10. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)