ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 906/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24/10/2016 in WP No. 7314/2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay) KULDIPSINGH MAANKOO AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUS CHANDRAKANT HARIBHAU LADKAT Respondent(s) (With appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and interim relief) Date : 20/01/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Satyajit A.Desai,Adv. Ms. Vrushali Maindad,Adv. Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.M.Jadhav,Adv. For M/s. S.M. Jadhav and Company,Advs. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard Mr.Satyajit A.Desai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S.M.Jadhav, learned counsel for the respondent. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The special leave petition is dismissed. 1
However, we direct the petitioners to continue to remain in premises till 30 th September, 2018 and thereafter give vacant and peaceful possession of the premises to the respondent on or before the said date, failing which the petitioners shall be liable for contempt of this Court. Needless to say that the petitioners shall pay the occupational charges to the respondent. With the aforesaid direction, the special leave petition stands disposed of. (Anita Malhotra) (H.S.Parasher) Court Master Court Master 2
LISTED ON: 20.01.2016 BEFORE COURT NO.:2 ITEM NO.: 26 SECTION – IX IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPEALATTE JURISDICTION PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 906 OF 2017 WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF WITH INTERLOCUTARY APPLICATION NO. 1 (Application for exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order) AND INTERLOCUTARY APPLICATION NO. 2 (Application for exemption from filing the file Official Translation) AND INTERLOCUTARY APPLICATION NO. 3 (Application for permission to file additional documents) KULDIPSINGH MAANKOO AND ORS ... PETITIONERS VERSUS CHANDRAKANT HARIBHAU LADKAT ...RESPONDENTS OFFICE REPORT It is submitted for the information of the Hon'ble Court that the counsel for the petitioner has on 17 th January, 2017 filed additional documents alongwith application for permission to file additional documents which is registered as Interlocutory Application No. 3 and the same is being circulated before the Hon'ble Court. The matter above mentioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this report. Dated this the 19 th day of January, 2017. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: 1. Ms. Anagha S. Desai, Advocate pm ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
¶ITEM NO.26 COURT NO.2 SECTION IX S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 906/2017(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24/10/2016in WP No. 7314/2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay)KULDIPSINGH MAANKOO AND ORS Petitioner(s) VERSUSCHANDRAKANT HARIBHAU LADKAT Respondent(s)(With appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and interim relief)Date : 20/01/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHIFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Satyajit A.Desai,Adv.Ms. Vrushali Maindad,Adv.Ms. Anagha S. Desai,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. S.M.Jadhav,Adv.For M/s. S.M. Jadhav and Company,Advs. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RHeard Mr.Satyajit A.Desai, learned counsel for thepetitioners and Mr. S.M.Jadhav, learned counsel for therespondent.Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we arenot inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Thespecial leave petition is dismissed.1However, we direct the petitioners to continue toremain in premises till 30 th September, 2018 andthereafter give vacant and peaceful possession of thepremises to the respondent on or before the said date,failing which the petitioners shall be liable forcontempt of this Court.Needless to say that the petitioners shall pay theoccupational charges to the respondent.With the aforesaid direction, the special leavepetition stands disposed of. (Anita Malhotra) (H.S.Parasher) Court Master Court Master2