THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI vs MRS. BHARTI H KAMAT — IA/3529/2026

Case under Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM010094032026

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

Filing Number

IA/5382/2026

Filing Date

23-02-2026

Registration No

IA/3529/2026

Registration Date

06-05-2026

Judge

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH

Coram

HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH

Bench Type

Single

Category

ELECTION ( 12 )

Sub-Category

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Acts & Sections

Bombay Municipal Corporation Act

Petitioner(s)

THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI

Adv. KOMAL PUNJABI BMC

ASSISTANT ENGINEER MAINTENANCE P/NORTH

Respondent(s)

MRS. BHARTI H KAMAT

MR. TARUN MAINIKCHAND JAIN

MRS. KAMAL U NAIK

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH

07-05-2026

FOR CIRCULATION

Orders

07-05-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV

Summary of IA/3529/2026 Case: Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Mrs. Bharti H. Kamat and Others Court: Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) Outcome: Case adjourned to June 12, 2026. The court issued notice to respondents (shopkeepers) and directed them to visit 12 alternate accommodation sites offered by the Corporation within four weeks, then file objections. Respondents must be served case documents immediately. The court acknowledged the public interest in road widening but mandated shopkeeper rehabilitation before any demolition, emphasizing that plaintiffs will be heard and their livelihood concerns considered alongside public needs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of IA/3529/2026 Case: Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Mrs. Bharti H. Kamat and Others Court: Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) Outcome: Case adjourned to June 12, 2026. The court issued notice to respondents (shopkeepers) and directed them to visit 12 alternate accommodation sites offered by the Corporation within four weeks, then file objections. Respondents must be served case documents immediately. The court acknowledged the public interest in road widening but mandated shopkeeper rehabilitation before any demolition, emphasizing that plaintiffs will be heard and their livelihood concerns considered alongside public needs. 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