CHANDRALOK PEOPLE WELFARE ASSOCIATION Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith.

(2.) There are two Affidavits in Reply by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ("MCGM") and an Affidavit in Reply by the 6th Respondent ("Vinay Dwivedi") on behalf of himself and Respondent Nos 7 and 8. Mr Raheja appears for Respondent No 9 who is a co-owner of the property and claims that Respondent Nos 6 to 8 are legal heirs of the original lessee. No reliefs are sought against Respondent No 9 who has apparently been joined as a necessary party.

(3.) Before us the matter has unfolded steadily but, as we shall presently see, in a wholly unsatisfactory fashion from 21/8/2023. We turn first to the orders that we passed since that date. They tell their own story.