Bombay High Court
SD CORPORATION PVT LTDversusJOGENDRA JOTIBA BAGE AND 20 ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- M S KARNIKS M MODAK
Holding
The court allowed the applicant to withdraw Rs. 19,50,000, subject to an undertaking, as there was no stay and the occupants were held ineligible.
Summary
The applicant, S.D. Corporation Pvt Ltd, filed an interim application seeking permission to withdraw Rs. 19,50,000 from a total deposit of Rs. 46,50,000 held in court. The respondents, including several occupants, were held ineligible for rent, rendering the question of rent entitlement moot. The occupants have appealed the ineligibility order before the GRC, but no stay of the order is in effect. The court found no impediment to the withdrawal and, subject to an undertaking, allowed the applicant to withdraw the requested amount. The court also directed that if the occupants later succeed in their pending petitions, the withdrawn amount must be returned to them as directed by the GRC or this court.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the occupants' ineligibility on the applicant's right to withdraw part of the deposited amount?
- Does the pending appeal before the GRC or the lack of a stay prevent the applicant from withdrawing the sum?
- Is an undertaking sufficient to safeguard the interests of the occupants pending further litigation?
Subjects
- interim relief
- deposit withdrawal
- eligibility of occupants
- rent entitlement
- stay of order
- GRC
- civil procedure
Judgment
66 Ia-1907-2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1907 OF 2023
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 2297 OF 2022
S. D. Corporation Pvt Ltd ...Applicant
Vs.
Jogendra Jotiba Bage
and 20 Ors. ...Respondents
*****
Adv. Ajit Hon a/w Adv. Atharva Deshmukh i/by PNP and Associates -
Advocate for the Applicant
Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy) - for the Respondent No. 4-SRA
Ms. Vaishali Ugale – For Respondent/BMC
Adv. Vidnyan Daware – For Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Ms. Varsha Sawant – AGP for Respondent-State.
*****
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK AND
S. M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 22nd JULY 2026
P. C. :-
1. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant-S. D. Corporation Pvt
Ltd..
2. This is an application for permitting the Applicant to withdraw
sum of Rs. 19,50,000/-, out of Rs. 46,50,000/- deposited by the
Digitally signed
by SEEMA
SEEMA KSHITIJ
YELKAR
KSHITIJ Date:
YELKAR 2026.07.23
14:37:17 Seema 1/3
+0530
66 Ia-1907-2023.doc
Applicant in this Court.
3. The Interim application is opposed by the learned counsel for
the Respondents. However, as a matter of record, the occupants have
been held to be ineligible, the question therefore of entitlement to rent
does not arise.
4. Learned counsel for the Occupants submitted that an appeal
against the order of holding the occupants ineligible has been preferred
before the GRC and in some cases, the appeals are dismissed by the
GRC. The order of GRC is challenged in this Court by some
occupants. As of today, there is no stay operating.
5. There is therefore no impediment in allowing the application. In
such view of the matter, for the reasons mentioned in the application,
we are inclined to allow the application in terms of prayer clause (a).
6. Learned counsel for the Applicant-S. D. Corporation Pvt Ltd.
submits that in case the occupants succeeds in the petition which is
pending before the GRC or in the petition which is pending in this
Court, the amounts shall be brought back and paid over to the
occupants in compliance with the direction of the GRC or that of this
Court.
Seema 2/3
66 Ia-1907-2023.doc
7. Let such an undertaking be filed in this Court within a period of
one week from today. Subject to aforesaid, the interim application is
allowed in terms of prayer clause (a).
8. Accordingly, Interim Application is disposed of.
(S. M. MODAK, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Seema 3/3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.