KAUSALYA SAMPAT Vs. MUMBAI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the Petitioner. None appears for the respondent though served.

(2.) THE short question which is raised for consideration before this court is whether cognizance can be taken of a complaint which is filed beyond the period of 90 days as prescribed under section 514-C of the Municipal Corporation Act. In the present case notice was issued to the petitioner for occupying the premises without obtaining occupation certificate. The Inspector of the Municipal Corporation after taking inspection in the month of January 1991, noticed that the petitioner was occupying the premises without obtaining necessary certificate and thereafter complaint was filed in October 1991.

(3.) IN support of the said submission he relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Deokaran Nenshi and another reported in AIR 1973 S.C. 908. The trial court dismissed the application. However the Sessions court also dismissed the criminal application. Against the said orders passed by the lower courts, he has filed the present criminal writ petition.