ABOOBAKAR HAJI ABDUL KADAR PERINGALAM CHERIYA AND ANOTHER vs DESIGNATED OFFICER-I, K-WEST WARD, AND ANOTHER — IA/3864/2026

Case under Bombay Municipal Corporation Act Section 104. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM010203832026

Filing Number

IA/11880/2026

Filing Date

21-Apr-2026

Registration No

IA/3864/2026

Registration Date

04-Jun-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

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bombay Municipal Corporation Act Section 104

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ABOOBAKAR HAJI ABDUL KADAR PERINGALAM CHERIYA AND ANOTHER

    Adv. Sarvesh Dixit

  2. 2.MUHAMMED SHAMEES

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DESIGNATED OFFICER-I, K-WEST WARD, AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 20-Aug-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Milind N. Jadhav

  3. 09-Jun-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  4. 08-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Justice Sharmila U. DeshmukhView PDF

    Case Summary: IA(L)-11880-2026 The Bombay High Court granted an interim stay of demolition proceedings against the appellants' construction. The Court found prima facie that the construction, though labeled "unauthorized" in the Section 351 notice, was actually sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, with the sanctioned plan subsequently obtained under the RTI Act. The matter was adjourned to 9th June 2026 for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  5. 21-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. IA/3864/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: IA(L)-11880-2026 The Bombay High Court granted an interim stay of demolition proceedings against the appellants' construction. The Court found prima facie that the construction, though labeled "unauthorized" in the Section 351 notice, was actually sanctioned by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, with the sanctioned plan subsequently obtained under the RTI Act. The matter was adjourned to 9th June 2026 for further hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case