Bombay High Court
M/S. DAI-ICHI KARKARIA LTD.(PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY SHRI. ASHOK ACHYUT DESAI)versusPIMPRI CHINCHWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONERAND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
The court granted leave to withdraw the appeal and application, disposed of them as withdrawn, and excluded the limitation period for filing a Section 406 appeal, while ordering that the bank guarantee may be withdrawn only after the appeal is decided.
Summary
The appellants sought leave to withdraw their First Appeal and a related civil application, and to file a fresh appeal under Section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. The court granted the leave, disposed of the First Appeal and the civil application as withdrawn, and excluded the period from the original suit filing (1 February 2003) for the purpose of limitation in filing a Section 406 appeal. The appellants had earlier deposited 50% of the amount claimed by the respondent corporation and furnished a bank guarantee for the balance; the Supreme Court had allowed the corporation to withdraw the deposited amount upon undertaking. The court directed that the bank guarantee could be withdrawn only after the Section 406 appeal is decided on its merits. The order clarifies that the pending issue concerns the remaining 50% amount claimed as octroi, and any application to withdraw the guarantee will be decided separately.
Issues considered
- Whether leave and liberty may be granted to withdraw the First Appeal and the civil application.
- Whether the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, is excluded.
- Whether the appellants may withdraw the bank guarantee pending the outcome of the Section 406 appeal.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- appeal withdrawal
- Section 406
- Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act
- bank guarantee
- limitation period
- octroi
- Supreme Court order
- civil application
Judgment
KVM
1/3
1 - FA 984 OF 2007.doc
Digitally
signed by
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
KANCHAN
KANCHAN VINOD
VINOD MAYEKAR
MAYEKAR Date:
2026.07.24
11:02:39
+0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FIRST APPEAL NO. 984/2007
ALONGWITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2243/2009
IN
FIRST APPEAL NO. 984/2007
M/S. DAI-ICHI KARKARIA
LTD.(PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY
SHRI. ASHOK ACHYUT DESAI) ….. APPELLANTS/
APPLICANTS
VS
PIMPRI CHINCHWAD MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY
THE COMMISSIONER & ANR. ….. RESPONDENTS
Mr. Zubin Behramkamdin, Senior Counsel a/w. Adv. Sneha Jaisingh,
Adv. Yash Arora, Adv. Janhavi Sakalkar i/b. Bharucha & Partners for
the Appellants/Applicants.
Mr. A. A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Counsel a/w. Adv. G. H. Keluskar for the
Respondent No. 1 – PCMC.
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 22 JULY, 2026
P.C. :-
1) Mr.Behramkamdin, learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the appellants on instructions seeks leave and liberty to withdraw the
present First Appeal and file appropriate proceedings under Section
406 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 (the Act)
KVM
2/3
1 - FA 984 OF 2007.doc
within 60 days from today.
1.1) Leave and liberty as prayed granted.
2) First Appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn.
3) In sequel, civil application, also stands disposed of.
4) As far as limitation is concerned, the period from filing
the suit i.e. 1 February 2003 before the Civil Judge Senior Division,
Pune till today shall stand excluded for the purpose of filing Appeal
under Section 406 of the Act .
5) Further at this stage, Mr.Behramkamdin, learned Senior
Counsel for the appellants submits that as per the earlier order passed
in the present First Appeal, the appellants had deposited 50% of the
amount claimed by the respondent Corporation in cash in this Court
and for balance 50% amount, bank guarantee was furnished which
has been renewed from time to time. He further submits that the ad-
interim order passed by this Court was carried to the Supreme Court,
and the Supreme Court allowed the Corporation to withdraw 50%
amount deposited by the appellants by giving undertaking to that
effect.
6) Mr.Behramkamdin learned Senior Counsel submits that
the appellants be allowed to withdraw the bank guarantee as the First
Appeal is being disposed of.
KVM
3/3
1 - FA 984 OF 2007.doc
7) As the Corporation has withdrawn the amount of 50%
deposited by the appellants, by giving undertaking as per order of
Supreme Court, the issue as regards to the bank guarantee is only
with regard to balance 50% of the amount as claimed by the
Corporation being towards octroi,
8) Once appellants file appeal under Section 406 of the Act,
the Court while considering the Appeal, apart from other sections, will
also consider Sub-section 406, the orders passed therein is complied,
only thereafter appellants are at liberty to make an application to this
Court for withdrawal of its bank guarantee. The said application
would be decided on its own merits.
[RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]
Checking your session…