AADITYA PEARL CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.THR ITS AUTHORISED PERSON MR SANNI VINODKUMAR JAIN vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI THR DESIGNATED OFFICER B AND F C WARD — AO/388/2026

Case under Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 13th February 2026.

CNR: HCBM010075402026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

AO/4314/2026

Filing Date

12-02-2026

Registration No

AO/388/2026

Registration Date

17-04-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV

Bench Type

Single

Category

ELECTION ( 12 )

Sub-Category

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

13th February 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

Bombay Municipal Corporation Act

Petitioner(s)

AADITYA PEARL CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.THR ITS AUTHORISED PERSON MR SANNI VINODKUMAR JAIN

Adv. Eshwaree

Respondent(s)

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI THR DESIGNATED OFFICER B AND F C WARD

MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPEMENT AUTHORITY THR CHIEF OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MUMBAI

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV

13-02-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

Orders

17-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV

Case Summary: AO/388/2026 The Bombay High Court allowed Aaditya Pearl Cooperative Housing Society's request for extension to file an Affidavit-in-Rejoinder, despite the Trial Court having rejected it as the six-week timeline for hearing the Notice of Motion had expired. The court rejected the defendants' opposition, ordering the plaintiff to file the Rejoinder by April 18, 2026, and directed the Trial Court to proceed with deciding the Notice of Motion thereafter as originally directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: AO/388/2026 The Bombay High Court allowed Aaditya Pearl Cooperative Housing Society's request for extension to file an Affidavit-in-Rejoinder, despite the Trial Court having rejected it as the six-week timeline for hearing the Notice of Motion had expired. The court rejected the defendants' opposition, ordering the plaintiff to file the Rejoinder by April 18, 2026, and directed the Trial Court to proceed with deciding the Notice of Motion thereafter as originally directed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case