VASANT KRUSHANT VANJARE and ANR. vs THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PUNE

Judgment text excerpt

4-SA-804-2001.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.804 OF 2001 Vasant Krushant Vanjare & Anr. …Appellants Versus The Municipal Corporation of the City of Pune …Respondent _______________________________________________________________ Ms. Anita Agarwal a/w Ms. Ashwini B. Jadhav, for the Appellants. Mr. R. M. Pethe (Through V. C.) for the Respondent. _______________________________________________________________ CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 2nd JULY 2025 JUDGMENT: 1. Heard Ms. Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants and Mr. Pethe, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent. 2. The challenge in this Second Appeal is to the Judgment and Decree dated 6th August, 2001 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Pune in Civil Appeal No.127 of 1998. By the said Judgment and Decree the said Appeal filed by the Respondent-Corporation has been allowed and Judgment and Decree passed by the learned Trial Court has been set aside. The learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, PMC, Court Pune, by Judgment and Decree dated 5th July, 1997 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.984 of 1996 decreed the said suit and declared that the notices of the Defendant-Corporation dated 29 th November, 1995, 12th December, 1995 and 5th June, 1996 are illegal and restrained Defendant from taking any action pursuant to those notices. 3. A learned Single Judge by order dated 17 th January, 2002 has Vaibhav Page No. 1 4-SA-804-2001.doc admitted the Second Appeal on the following substantial questions of law: “(1) Whether the Learned Judge has rightly considered the provisions of Section 487 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 and whether the suit was not maintainable for want of notice under the said Section?