2015 (9) TMI 1757

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....9.2011, has approached this Court seeking the relief of quashing and setting aside the impugned order and a direction to the Metropolitan Magistrate to condone the delay in filing the complaint (if any) and issue process. 3. The background in which the present Writ Petition is filed is as follows:- (a) The Municipal Corporation had issued a notice under Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (the said Act) to the present respondent No. 1 and others calling upon them to carry out structural repairs of the said building within one month from the date of issue of notice i.e. prior to 1.3.2011. Upon noticing that earlier directions were not followed, the second notice was issued on 22.2.2011. (b) The offi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. By an order dated 5.12.2011, this Court (Coram: M.L. Tahaliyani, J.) has dismissed the said application holding that: "there is no provision for condonation of delay in filing the complaint under the M.M.C. Act." "It is to be noted that u/s. 468 of Cr.P.C. there is bar on taking cognizance of offence by the Court after lapse of the period of limitation mentioned in the said section. Section 473 gives discretion to the Court to condone the delay whereas u/s. 514 of MMC Act, the limitation is provided for filing of complaint in the Court of Magistrate." "If the complaint is not made before the concerned Magistrate, within the time prescribed by Section 514 the same is required....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....el appearing for the Society i.e. respondent No. 3 had submitted that in December 2013, the Society has filed a report informing that the repair work has commenced but the Corporation has stayed the said repair work. He has challenged the stoppage of work by the Corporation by filing a suit for injunction before the Dindoshi Court. The matter was adjourned from time to time. 9. On 11.4.2014, the original complainant who had moved an application for issuing notice under Section 354 had sought liberty to file Intervention Application which was registered as Criminal Application No. 167 of 2014. The complainant was allowed to intervene. The matter has been pending since then. 10. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, this Court had....