THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION GREATER MUMBAIversusYUSUF RAHIMATULLA KHANDEWANI AND ANR

                                                                        901-WP-12684-2026.DOC

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                       WRIT PETITION NO. 12684 OF 2026


                      The Municipal Corporation Greater Mumbai               ..Petitioner

                              Versus

                      Yusuf Rahimatulla Khandewani and Anr              …Respondents


                      Mr. Girish Godbole, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Santosh Mali,
                           for the Petitioner – BMC.

                      Mr. Girish B Kedia, a/w Mr. Manoj G Agre, for Respondents.

                      Mr. Santosh Singade, Officer, S. E. k/w Ward BMC.


                                                 CORAM :       N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                 DATE    :     01st OCTOBER 2026

                      P.C.:

                      1.      Heard Mr. Godbole, the learned Senior Advocate for the
SAINATH
SANJAY
BODKHE
Digitally signed by
SAINATH SANJAY
BODKHE
Date: 2026.10.03
                      petitioner.
12:24:13 +0530




                      2.      The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 28 th

                      August, 2026 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court

                      whereby an application preferred by the petitioner to dismiss

                      the execution petition, came to be dismissed.

                      3.      The said application was filed on the premise that, in SLP

                      (C) No. 5056/2014, the decree holders/respondents herein were

                      granted liberty to move before the Competent Authority for

                      SAINATH, PA                        1/2
                                                         901-WP-12684-2026.DOC

alternate accommodation, if permissible under the law, and that

such      representation   made   by     the    respondent       has    been

considered and rejected by the Competent Authority.

4.      Evidently, the decree passed in L C Suit No. 756/2009 is

in force and it has not been stayed by the first Appellate Court.

Thus, the application for dismissal of the execution petition was

wholly misconceived.

5.      The   Writ   Petition   stands       dismissed    with    costs    of

Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner, with Maharashtra

State Legal Services Authority, within a period of three weeks.



                                               [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




SAINATH, PA                            2/2