Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

J KUMAR INFRAPROJECTS LTDversusMUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court disposed of the writ petitions as withdrawn, allowing the parties to pursue settlement and permitting the petitioner to approach the court later if settlement does not materialize.

Summary

The petitioners, J. Kumar Infraprojects Ltd., filed three writ petitions before the Bombay High Court seeking relief against the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority. The respondents indicated a willingness to settle the dispute and requested the petitioners to withdraw the pending proceedings. The petitioners agreed to withdraw the petitions to explore settlement negotiations, reserving the right to approach the court again if settlement fails. The respondents expressed no objection to the withdrawal. Consequently, the court disposed of all three writ petitions as withdrawn, while granting the petitioners liberty to seek judicial remedy in the future if needed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner may withdraw the pending writ petitions and have the court dispose of them without adjudicating the substantive claims

Subjects

  • withdrawal of writ petition
  • settlement negotiations
  • civil procedure
  • high court discretion

Judgment

                                                                                        903-WP.1999.2025+2.odt

     JVS.
                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

JAYANT
VISHWANATH
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 1999 OF 2025
SALUNKE
                                                      WITH
Digitally signed by
JAYANT VISHWANATH
SALUNKE
Date: 2026.08.20
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 2001 OF 2025
11:28:49 +0530

                                                      WITH
                                          WRIT PETITION NO. 2004 OF 2025

                      J. Kumar Infraprojects Ltd.           }              Petitioner
                            Versus
                      Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development}
                      Authority                             }              Respondent


                      Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar with Ms. Madhu Gadodia, Ms.Amruta
                      Thakur and Mr. Aryan Garg i/b. Naik Naik & Co. for the Petitioner.

                      Mr. Saket Mone i/b. Vidhi Partners, for the Respondent-MMRDA.


                                   CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. &
                                           GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
                                   DATE      : 19th AUGUST, 2026
                      P.C.:
                      1.           The learned Advocate for the Petitioner draws our attention to

                      the withdrawal praecipe dated 18th August, 2026 tendered to the Court. The

                      same is marked as ‘X’, for identification.




                      2.           It is pointed out that the concerned Respondent expect the

                      Petitioner to withdraw the pending proceedings and enter into discussions for

                      exploring the possibility of a settlement. In view of this aspect, the Petitioner

                      desires to withdraw these Petitions and explore the possibility of a


                                                              1
                                                               903-WP.1999.2025+2.odt


settlement. It is submitted that in the event the settlement proceedings do not

fructify, the Petitioner would be approaching the appropriate forum for the

redressal of its grievances.



3.           The Respondent has no-objection.


4.           In view of the above, all these Petitions are disposed off as

withdrawn, since the parties desire to explore the possibility of a settlement.


5.           In the event the parties are unable to come to terms, liberty is

granted to the Petitioner to avail of the remedy as is permissible in law.



     [GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.]                   [ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                       2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.