IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5091 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5091 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5091 OF 2004 The Greater Bombay Co-op. The Greater Bombay Co-op. The Greater Bombay Co-op. Bank Limited ... Petitioner Bank Limited ... Petitioner Bank Limited ... Petitioner versus versus versus M/s. Snowcem India Ltd. M/s. Snowcem India Ltd. M/s. Snowcem India Ltd. and others ... Respondents and others ... Respondents and others ... Respondents ... ... ... Mr. Virendra Tulzapurkar, with Mr. Amit Mr. Virendra Tulzapurkar, with Mr. Amit Mr. Virendra Tulzapurkar, with Mr. Amit Jamsande i/by Shaunak Satpute & Co., for the Jamsande i/by Shaunak Satpute & Co., for the Jamsande i/by Shaunak Satpute & Co., for the Petitioner. Petitioner. Petitioner. Mr. Arif Bookwala with Mr. M.H. Rawal, for Mr. Arif Bookwala with Mr. M.H. Rawal, for Mr. Arif Bookwala with Mr. M.H. Rawal, for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. R.V. Govilkar, for Respondent No. 3. Mr. R.V. Govilkar, for Respondent No. 3. Mr. R.V. Govilkar, for Respondent No. 3. ... ... ... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Mr. Rawal waives notice for Respondents Nos. 1 Mr. Rawal waives notice for Respondents Nos. 1 Mr. Rawal waives notice for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Govilkar waives notice for and 2 and Mr. Govilkar waives notice for and 2 and Mr. Govilkar waives notice for Respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 3. . As short question is involved, petition . As short question is involved, petition . As short question is involved, petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith by is taken up for final disposal forthwith by is taken up for final disposal forthwith by consent. consent. consent. . Mr. Govilkar has raised a technical . Mr. Govilkar has raised a technical . Mr. Govilkar has raised a technical objection regarding maintainability of this objection regarding maintainability of this objection regarding maintainability of this petition. It is contended that the petition is petition. It is contended that the petition is petition. It is contended that the petition is presented under Article 226 of the Constitution presented under Article 226 of the Constitution presented under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and upon reading the prayer clause of of India and upon reading the prayer clause of of India and upon reading the prayer clause of the petition, the same will at best be the petition, the same will at best be the petition, the same will at best be maintainable before the Division Bench and Single maintainable before the Division Bench and Single maintainable before the Division Bench and Single Judge will have no jurisdiction to finally Judge will have no jurisdiction to finally Judge will have no jurisdiction to finally dispose of the same. In response to the said dispose of the same. In response to the said dispose of the same. In response to the said preliminary objection, Counsel for the Petitioner preliminary objection, Counsel for the Petitioner preliminary objection, Counsel for the Petitioner fairly states that the Petitioner will carry out fairly states that the Petitioner will carry out fairly states that the Petitioner will carry out the necessary amendment in order to bring the the necessary amendment in order to bring the the necessary amendment in order to bring the petition and the prayer clauses within the petition and the prayer clauses within the petition and the prayer clauses within the parameters of Article 227 of the Constitution of parameters of Article 227 of the Constitution of parameters of Article 227 of the Constitution of India, because the Petitioner is essentially India, because the Petitioner is essentially India, because the Petitioner is essentially questioning the correctness of the order passed questioning the correctness of the order passed questioning the correctness of the order passed by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Court, by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Court, by the Maharashtra State Co-operative Court, Mumbai dated March 31, 2004 in Miscellaneous Mumbai dated March 31, 2004 in Miscellaneous Mumbai dated March 31, 2004 in Miscellaneous Application No. 46 of 2004 in Appeal No. 14 of Application No. 46 of 2004 in Appeal No. 14 of Application No. 46 of 2004 in Appeal No. 14 of 2004. In view of the submission made on behalf 2004. In view of the submission made on behalf 2004. In view of the submission made on behalf of the Petitioner, I find no reason to non-suit of the Petitioner, I find no reason to non-suit of the Petitioner, I find no reason to non-suit the Petitioner on the technical objection raised the Petitioner on the technical objection raised the Petitioner on the technical objection raised by Mr. Govilkar. Instead, in the interest of by Mr. Govilkar. Instead, in the interest of by Mr. Govilkar. Instead, in the interest of justice, the Petitioner is permitted to carry out justice, the Petitioner is permitted to carry out justice, the Petitioner is permitted to carry out the amendment to the petition, which the Counsel the amendment to the petition, which the Counsel the amendment to the petition, which the Counsel for the Petitioner has assured, will be done in for the Petitioner has assured, will be done in for the Petitioner has assured, will be done in the course of the day. the course of the day. the course of the day. Ordered accordingly. In Ordered accordingly. In Ordered accordingly. In view of the above, matter is proceeded on merits. view of the above, matter is proceeded on merits. view of the above, matter is proceeded on merits. . The order which is impugned in this . The order which is impugned in this . The order which is impugned in this petition was passed on the application filed by petition was passed on the application filed by petition was passed on the application filed by Respondent No. 3 in the pending appeal preferred Respondent No. 3 in the pending appeal preferred Respondent No. 3 in the pending appeal preferred by Respondent No.1 before the Co-operative by Respondent No.1 before the Co-operative by Respondent No.1 before the Co-operative Appellate Court, Mumbai. The dispute is pending Appellate Court, Mumbai. The dispute is pending Appellate Court, Mumbai. The dispute is pending between the Petitioner and Respondents Nos. 1 between the Petitioner and Respondents Nos. 1 between the Petitioner and Respondents Nos. 1 and 2. In the said pending dispute, Respondent and 2. In the said pending dispute, Respondent and 2. In the said pending dispute, Respondent No. 3 filed application for intervention which No. 3 filed application for intervention which No. 3 filed application for intervention which application was rejected by order dated 13th July application was rejected by order dated 13th July application was rejected by order dated 13th July 2004. It is not in dispute that the said order 2004. It is not in dispute that the said order 2004. It is not in dispute that the said order is not challenged by Respondent No.3, whereas it is not challenged by Respondent No.3, whereas it is not challenged by Respondent No.3, whereas it was questioned by Respondent No. 1 before the was questioned by Respondent No. 1 before the was questioned by Respondent No. 1 before the Co-operative Appellate Court, Mumbai, being Co-operative Appellate Court, Mumbai, being Co-operative Appellate Court, Mumbai, being Appeal No. 14 of 2004. Whether such an appeal Appeal No. 14 of 2004. Whether such an appeal Appeal No. 14 of 2004. Whether such an appeal is maintainable or not is not an issue before me. is maintainable or not is not an issue before me. is maintainable or not is not an issue before me. What is relevant to note is that while the said What is relevant to note is that while the said What is relevant to note is that while the said appeal was pending, Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal was pending, Respondent No. 3 filed an appeal was pending, Respondent No. 3 filed an application with a specific prayer that he may be application with a specific prayer that he may be application with a specific prayer that he may be added as party Respondent to the said appeal. added as party Respondent to the said appeal. added as party Respondent to the said appeal. While considering that application, the While considering that application, the While considering that application, the Co-operative Appellate Court by the impugned Co-operative Appellate Court by the impugned Co-operative Appellate Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 31st March 2004 has not judgment and order dated 31st March 2004 has not judgment and order dated 31st March 2004 has not only allowed the said application, but also only allowed the said application, but also only allowed the said application, but also ordered that the Respondent No. 3 be added as ordered that the Respondent No. 3 be added as ordered that the Respondent No. 3 be added as opponent in the trial Court. Such an order opponent in the trial Court. Such an order opponent in the trial Court. Such an order virtually decides the main controversy pending in virtually decides the main controversy pending in virtually decides the main controversy pending in the appeal preferred by Respondent No. 1 against the appeal preferred by Respondent No. 1 against the appeal preferred by Respondent No. 1 against the order passed by the trial Court of rejection the order passed by the trial Court of rejection the order passed by the trial Court of rejection of application preferred by Respondent No. 3 of application preferred by Respondent No. 3 of application preferred by Respondent No. 3 dated January 13, 2004. Such a course cannot be dated January 13, 2004. Such a course cannot be dated January 13, 2004. Such a course cannot be countenanced. The order, which is challenged in countenanced. The order, which is challenged in countenanced. The order, which is challenged in this petition, therefore, cannot be sustained in this petition, therefore, cannot be sustained in this petition, therefore, cannot be sustained in law. The Appellate Court has committed manifest law. The Appellate Court has committed manifest law. The Appellate Court has committed manifest error in allowing the application, that too to error in allowing the application, that too to error in allowing the application, that too to the extent of directing impleadment of Respondent the extent of directing impleadment of Respondent the extent of directing impleadment of Respondent No. 3 as opponent in the trial Court. That No. 3 as opponent in the trial Court. That No. 3 as opponent in the trial Court. That question will have to be examined in the pending question will have to be examined in the pending question will have to be examined in the pending appeal No. 14 of 2004. Accordingly, the appeal No. 14 of 2004. Accordingly, the appeal No. 14 of 2004. Accordingly, the impugned order is modified to the extent that impugned order is modified to the extent that impugned order is modified to the extent that Respondent No. 3 be added as party Respondent in Respondent No. 3 be added as party Respondent in Respondent No. 3 be added as party Respondent in the pending appeal before the appellate Court. the pending appeal before the appellate Court. the pending appeal before the appellate Court. This order, however, will not create any right in This order, however, will not create any right in This order, however, will not create any right in favour of Respondent No. 3 to contend that she favour of Respondent No. 3 to contend that she favour of Respondent No. 3 to contend that she should be added as party Respondent No. 3 in the should be added as party Respondent No. 3 in the should be added as party Respondent No. 3 in the pending dispute because that issue will have to pending dispute because that issue will have to pending dispute because that issue will have to be decided in the pending appeal. Besides, the be decided in the pending appeal. Besides, the be decided in the pending appeal. Besides, the appellate Court will be free to examine the appellate Court will be free to examine the appellate Court will be free to examine the question of locus of Respondent No. 1 to question of locus of Respondent No. 1 to question of locus of Respondent No. 1 to maintain appeal in respect of order which was maintain appeal in respect of order which was maintain appeal in respect of order which was passed against Respondent No. 3 by the trial passed against Respondent No. 3 by the trial passed against Respondent No. 3 by the trial Court. All such questions are left open to be Court. All such questions are left open to be Court. All such questions are left open to be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. decided on its own merits in accordance with law. decided on its own merits in accordance with law. Appeal be decided as expeditiously as possible, Appeal be decided as expeditiously as possible, Appeal be decided as expeditiously as possible, preferably within four weeks from today. preferably within four weeks from today. preferably within four weeks from today. . Rule made absolute accordingly with no . Rule made absolute accordingly with no . Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. order as to costs. order as to costs. . All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5291 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5291 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5291 OF 2004 Ramesh Vishnupant Khandwe Ramesh Vishnupant Khandwe Ramesh Vishnupant Khandwe and another ... Petitioners and another ... Petitioners and another ... Petitioners versus versus versus The Additional District The Additional District The Additional District Collector, Pune ... Respondent Collector, Pune ... Respondent Collector, Pune ... Respondent ... ... ... Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, A.G.P., for the Respondent. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, A.G.P., for the Respondent. Mr. C.R. Sonawane, A.G.P., for the Respondent. ... ... ... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Issue notice. Mr. Sonawane, A.G.P., . Issue notice. Mr. Sonawane, A.G.P., . Issue notice. Mr. Sonawane, A.G.P., waives notice for the Respondent. Two weeks’ waives notice for the Respondent. Two weeks’ waives notice for the Respondent. Two weeks’ time is granted for filing reply and one week time is granted for filing reply and one week time is granted for filing reply and one week thereafter for filing rejoinder affidavit, if thereafter for filing rejoinder affidavit, if thereafter for filing rejoinder affidavit, if any. any. any. . Mr. Anturkar states on instructions that . Mr. Anturkar states on instructions that . Mr. Anturkar states on instructions that the Petitioners are carrying on the mining the Petitioners are carrying on the mining the Petitioners are carrying on the mining activity on the suit property. Mr. Sonawane activity on the suit property. Mr. Sonawane activity on the suit property. Mr. Sonawane submits that it is impermissible for the submits that it is impermissible for the submits that it is impermissible for the Petitioner to carry on such activity in absence Petitioner to carry on such activity in absence Petitioner to carry on such activity in absence of any valid licence in favour of the Petitioners of any valid licence in favour of the Petitioners of any valid licence in favour of the Petitioners and which has not been renewed so far. Mr. and which has not been renewed so far. Mr. and which has not been renewed so far. Mr. Anturkar, however, submits that the Petitioners Anturkar, however, submits that the Petitioners Anturkar, however, submits that the Petitioners are carrying on mining activity on the assumption are carrying on mining activity on the assumption are carrying on mining activity on the assumption that mining licence is deemed to be renewed after that mining licence is deemed to be renewed after that mining licence is deemed to be renewed after the statutory period is over. Without expressing the statutory period is over. Without expressing the statutory period is over. Without expressing any opinion on the correctness of the submission, any opinion on the correctness of the submission, any opinion on the correctness of the submission, the Petitioners may proceed to carry on their the Petitioners may proceed to carry on their the Petitioners may proceed to carry on their activities at their own risk, cost and activities at their own risk, cost and activities at their own risk, cost and consequences and if permissible by law. consequences and if permissible by law. consequences and if permissible by law. . Petition be placed under the caption . Petition be placed under the caption . Petition be placed under the caption "After Notice" in the week commencing from 19th "After Notice" in the week commencing from 19th "After Notice" in the week commencing from 19th July 2004. July 2004. July 2004. . All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court order duly authenticated by the Court Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. Stenographer of this Court. (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR,J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5300 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5300 OF 2004 WRIT PETITION NO. 5300 OF 2004 P. Narayan and others ... Petitioners P. Narayan and others ... Petitioners P. Narayan and others ... Petitioners versus versus versus Municipal Corporation of City Municipal Corporation of City Municipal Corporation of City of Pune and another ... Respondents of Pune and another ... Respondents of Pune and another ... Respondents ... ... ... Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. A.V. Anturkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. R.M. Pethe for Mr. R.G. Ketkar, for the Mr. R.M. Pethe for Mr. R.G. Ketkar, for the Mr. R.M. Pethe for Mr. R.G. Ketkar, for the Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1. ... ... ... CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR,J. 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 29th June 2004 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. . Heard Counsel appearing for the parties. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned I see no reason to interfere with the impugned I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Court below in application order passed by the Court below in application order passed by the Court below in application under section 9A(2) of the Code. under section 9A(2) of the Code. under section 9A(2) of the Code. . At this stage, Mr. Anturkar submits that At this stage, Mr. Anturkar submits that At this stage, Mr. Anturkar submits that although several arguable questions are raised, although several arguable questions are raised, although several arguable questions are raised, the Petitioner has already deposited sum of Rs.3 the Petitioner has already deposited sum of Rs.3 the Petitioner has already deposited sum of Rs.3 lakhs with the Corporation and is ready and lakhs with the Corporation and is ready and lakhs with the Corporation and is ready and willing to deposit further balance amount within willing to deposit further balance amount within willing to deposit further balance amount within four weeks from today, but seeks favour that the four weeks from today, but seeks favour that the four weeks from today, but seeks favour that the appellate authority be directed to decide the appellate authority be directed to decide the appellate authority be directed to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible. There can appeal as expeditiously as possible. There can appeal as expeditiously as possible. There can be no difficulty in accepting this request of be no difficulty in accepting this request of be no difficulty in accepting this request of expediting the hearing of the appeal filed under expediting the hearing of the appeal filed under expediting the hearing of the appeal filed under section 406 of the B.P.M.C. Act if the section 406 of the B.P.M.C. Act if the section 406 of the B.P.M.C. Act if the Petitioners were to deposit the entire Petitioners were to deposit the entire Petitioners were to deposit the entire outstanding amount as demanded within four weeks outstanding amount as demanded within four weeks outstanding amount as demanded within four weeks from today. On such deposit being made by the from today. On such deposit being made by the from today. On such deposit being made by the Petitioners with the Corporation, the Petitioners Petitioners with the Corporation, the Petitioners Petitioners with the Corporation, the Petitioners to apply to the appellate authority for to apply to the appellate authority for to apply to the appellate authority for expediting the hearing of the appeal and if such expediting the hearing of the appeal and if such expediting the hearing of the appeal and if such application is made, the appellate Court will be application is made, the appellate Court will be application is made, the appellate Court will be well-advised to finally decide the said appeal as well-advised to finally decide the said appeal as well-advised to finally decide the said appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six expeditiously as possible, preferably within six expeditiously as possible, preferably within six weeks from the date of the application. weeks from the date of the application. weeks from the date of the application. . Status quo as of today be maintained for . Status quo as of today be maintained for . Status quo as of today be maintained for a period of four weeks to enable the Petitioners a period of four weeks to enable the Petitioners a period of four weeks to enable the Petitioners to deposit the balance outstanding amount as to deposit the balance outstanding amount as to deposit the balance outstanding amount as referred to above as per the assurance given to referred to above as per the assurance given to referred to above as per the assurance given to this Court. this Court. this Court. Petition disposed of on the above Petition disposed of on the above Petition disposed of on the above terms. terms. terms. . All concerned to act on the copy of this . All concerned to act on the copy of this .