Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2017 DAILYLAW 3030 (BOM)

SHREE NAMAN HOTELS PVT. LTD. v. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR

WP/3209/2017 · 2026-04-08

Shri Suman Shyam

body2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

901-oswp-3209-2017.doc Shephali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3209 OF 2017 Shree Naman Hotels Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority & Ors. ...Respondents ….. Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vaibhav Krishna & Mr. Tahir Pande, i/b Juris Consillis, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr. Pravin Samdani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Nishant Chotani, Mr. Nivit Srivastava, Ms. Sneha Patil, Ms. Aditi Sinha, Mr. Hrishikesh Joshi & Ms. Isha Vyas, i/b Maniar Srivastava Associates, Advocates for the Respondents. ….. CORAM: SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ & SUMAN SHYAM, J. DATE: 8th APRIL 2026 PC:- The judgment in Writ Petition is delivered in the open Court today in the presence of the learned counsels for the respective parties. The Writ Petition is allowed with certain observations and directions. 2. At this stage, Mr Pravin Samdani, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Respondent No. 1-MMRDA makes a prayer for staying the operation and implementation of the Judgment delivered in this Writ Petition. SHEPHALI SANJAY MORMARE Digitally signed by SHEPHALI SANJAY MORMARE Date: 2026.04.10 12:40:24 +0530 901-oswp-3209-2017.doc 3. We have already held that the action of the Respondent No. 1-MMRDA was arbitrary and illegal. Any order of stay against the Judgment delivered today shall perpetuate illegality. Therefore, the prayer is declined. However, we may indicate that we have already given 90 (ninety) days time to the Respondent No. 1- MMRDA to make refund as applicable. 4. Let the original signed judgment be kept in the records. (SUMAN SHYAM, J) (CHIEF JUSTICE) {