Bombay High Court
GHANSHYAMBHAI MAGANLAL CHOTALIYAversusMAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA EMPLOYEES CO-OP.HO.SOC.LTD. THR. SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHARMILA U DESHMUKH
Holding
The court held that the municipal corporation must permit both the plaintiff and the society to participate in the acquisition proceedings, consider their ownership documents, and that the interim application is dismissed.
Summary
The appeal concerned the right, title and interest in a property slated for acquisition by the Municipal Corporation for road widening. The appellant, who is also the original plaintiff in a pending title suit, sought permission to participate in the acquisition proceedings and submit ownership documents. Respondent No.1 (the society) agreed to the plaintiff’s participation provided it too was heard and given copies of all documents. The court noted that compensation decisions must consider ownership documents and that any adverse order could be challenged in the pending suit. Accordingly, the court directed the corporation to allow both the plaintiff and the society to participate, produce their documents, and hear them before deciding, and dismissed the interim application.
Issues considered
- Whether the plaintiff/appellant may be permitted to participate in the municipal corporation's acquisition proceedings despite a pending title suit.
- Whether the corporation must allow the society (Defendant No.1) to be heard and consider ownership documents in the acquisition process.
- Whether the interim application seeking relief survives for consideration.
Subjects
- municipal acquisition
- land title
- compensation
- road widening
- participation in proceedings
- interim application
- pending suit
Judgment
36-AO-843-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 843 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 15048 OF 2024
IN
APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 843 OF 2024
Ghanshyambhai Maganlal Chotaliya ...Applicant/
Appellant
Versus
Mahindra And Mahindra Employees Co-p.Ho.Soc.Ltd. ...Respondents
Thr. Secretary And Ors.
——————
Mr. Rahul Kedar i/b Mr. Chirag Gandhi, for the Appellant.
Mr. Uday Jaguste a/w Mr. Rishikesh More, for the Respondent No. 1.
Ms. Neeta Jadhav i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi, for the Respondent-BMC.
——————
CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : June 12, 2026
P. C. :
1. The issue involved in the present case is of right, title and
interest in the suit property which is subject of proposed acquisition by
Municipal Corporation for the purpose of road widening.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Original Plaintiff submits that
based on revenue entry, the Trial Court has accepted the case of
ownership of the Defendant-society and rejected the Interim
Arya 1 of 3
36-AO-843-2024.doc
Application. He submits that as the acquisition proceedings have not
yet commenced, the Plaintiff be permitted to participate in the
acquisition proceedings and submit necessary documents for
consideration of the Corporation.
3. Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 1 submits that it has no
objection to the participation of the Plaintiff in the acquisition
proceedings provided the Defendant No. 1-society is heard in the
acquisition proceedings and is supplied with copies of all documents to
be furnished by the Plaintiff in the acquisition proceedings.
4. As the issue is about payment of compensation for purpose of
acquisition, the Corporation is required to take into consideration the
ownership documents. The Suit for title is pending before the Trial
Court, and in event, any order is passed by the Corporation, the
aggrieved party can raise necessary challenge in appropriate
proceedings.
5. In light of the consensus arrived at between the parties, Appeal
from Order is disposed of with direction to the Municipal Corporation
to permit the Plaintiff and Defendant No. 1 to participate in the
proposed acquisition proceedings and produce all documents in
support of their claim and pass an order after hearing Plaintiff and
Defendant No. 1. With these directions, Appeal from Order is disposed
of.
Arya 2 of 3
36-AO-843-2024.doc
6. Interim Application does not survive for consideration and
stands disposed of.
7. Needless to clarify that there should be no private negotiations
between the Corporation and Defendant No. 1-society for the purpose
of handing over possession of suit property without notice to the
Plaintiff.
[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]
Arya 3 of 3
Checking your session…