sa45.10 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ SECOND APPEAL NO.45 OF 2010 ,With CA/651/2010 ,In SA/45/2010 AND/WITH SA/46/2010 SHANTARAM RAMCHANDRA BHUJABAL THROUGH GPA R S BHUJBAL VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AURANGABAD ANDORS ... Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Totala Rameshwar F. Advocate for Respondents : Mr. Tope Sambhaji S. for R/1, Mr. Bajaj Anil S. Adv for R/2 to 4. ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. Dated: December 09, 2011 ... These appeals have been filed challenging the judgment and order in RCA No.9/2007 & RCA No.10/2007 dated 3rd July, 2009 passed by District Judge-4, Aurangabad thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant and confirming the judgment and decree dt.21.12.2006 passed by the C.J.S.D., Aurangabad in RCS No. sa45.10 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ 1098/2000 & RCS No.532/2004. 2 This Court has already dismissed the Second Appeal No.192/2010. Many points raised in these second appeals also overlap the points raised in the said second appeal and only point which is required to be considered is whether the notice issued by the respondent Corporation to the appellant was valid notice and whether it was in collusion with landlord. 3 At the outset, it would be relevant to reproduce herein below section 264 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, which reads thus: "264(1). If it shall at any time appear to the Commissioner that any structure (including under this expression any building, wall, parapet, pavement, floor, steps, railings, door or window frames or shutter or roof, or other structure and anything affixed to or projecting from or resting or any building, wall, parapet or other sa45.10 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ structure) is in a ruinous condition or likely to fall, or in any way dangerous to any person occupying, resorting to or passing by such structure or any other structure or place in the neighborhood thereof, the Commissioner may, by written notice, require the owner or occupier of such structure to pull down, secure, remove or repair such structure or things or do one or more of such things and to prevent all cause of danger therefrom (2) The Commissioner may also, if he thinks fit, require the said owner or occupier by the said notice, either forthwith or before proceeding to pull down, secure, remove or repair the said structure or thing, to set up a proper and sufficient hoard or fence for the protection of passers-by and other persons, with a convenient platform and hand-rail if there be room enough for the same and the Commissioner shall think the same desirable to serve as a foot way for passengers outside of such hoard or fence." 4 It is an admitted position that the building, in which the said premises are situated, is 100 years old. It is not in dispute that since 1987 the Corporation sa45.10 4 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ was issuing notices to all concerned that the building is in dilapidated condition and required to be demolished. It is not in dispute that the first and second floors are demolished and certain part of ground floor has also been demolished. Therefore, the contention of the appellant such notices were issued by the Corporation in collusion with landlord, is devoid of any merits. It is not the contention of the appellant that the case of the appellant was picked up in isolation and notice was issued to him only. Notices were issued to all persons who were occupying the said building. Therefore, both the Courts have rightly held that the notice issued by the Corporation was not in collusion with the landlord. Therefore, in view of the concurrent findings recorded by the courts below, in my opinion, the notice was issued by the Municipal Corporation after satisfying itself that the building was in dilapidated condition and required to be demolished. sa45.10 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD _____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________ 5 Viewed from any angle, none of the grounds raised in the second appeals raise substantial question of law for consideration of this Court. Hence, second appeals are dismissed summarily. Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed of. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) PLK/*