1 WP-9726.11.sxw lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9726 OF 2011 Sangli Miraj and Kupwad City Municipal Corporation, Sangli, Through Commissioner : Petitioner versus Tanaji Venkatrao Ingale and ors. : Respondents. Mr.N V Walawalkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Umesh R Mankapure for the Petitioner CORAM : R M SAVANT, J. DATE : 22nd September 2011 P.C. 1 In the light of the directions to be issued, it is not necessary to issue notice. 2 A decree has been passed in Regular Civil Suit No.311 of 2006 to the following effect:- “The defendant No.1 Corporation is hereby directed to remove all the vegetable vendors, hawkers, stall holders etc. from the following public streets, (commonly called as Loni Bazar) as well as foot path adjacent to them, within 60 days from the date of this order - a) Fire Fighter Chowk to Hind Mata Chowk b) Hind Mata Chowk to Datta Mandir Chowk and c) Hind Mata Chowk to Vidhyamandir Prashala. The defendant No.1 to take necessary action so that these public streets shall not be again encroached by any sort of illegal encroachment, resulting in obstruction to the pedestrians and vehicular traffic.” 2 WP-9726.11.sxw 3 It appears that the said decree was put in execution by the Respondents/Plaintiffs, and in the said execution proceedings an order came to be passed for issuance of warrant of detention of the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of the Petitioner-Municipal Corporation. The said order came to be challenged by the Petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.8937 of 2011. The said Writ Petition was allowed to be withdrawn by permitting the Petitioner to file an application before the Executing Court that it has complied with the decree in question. Accordingly an application has been filed by the Petitioner before the Executing Court with supporting affidavit of the Deputy Commissioner that there is a compliance of the decree in question. 4 It is the case of the Petitioner that the said application has been kept pending, however, the Executing Court has issued oral directions to the Petitioner to give an undertaking to the effect that henceforth the Petitioner would see to it that there is no encroachment on the public streets. A statement is also made in the Petition that the Deputy Commissioner was personally called in the Chamber of the Learned Judge and was directed to keep the Commissioner present in Court. It is the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner that such directions that too oral which are beyond the scope of the decree could not have been given by the Executing Court. 3 WP-9726.11.sxw 5 In my view, if the statements made by the Petitioner in the above Petition as regards the oral directions and summoning the Commissioner as above are correct, the same would be a serious matter, and would have to be further looked into if need be. However, for the present assuming that such oral directions are issued, the same would stand stayed. The Executing Court is directed to consider the application of the Petitioner that it has complied with the decree in question and adjudicate upon the same on its own merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from 24/11/2011 which, according to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, is the next date in the Execution Application. 6 With the aforesaid directions, the above Writ Petition is disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]