Authority: Supreme Court of India
Order Date: 04-08-2026
Case Overview
- Petitioners: Sandip Vasant Thakre & Ors.
- Respondents: The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Origin: Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 17697/2024, arising from the impugned judgment and order dated 04-10-2024 in CRLWP(ST) No. 10818/2024 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.
- Counsel for Petitioners: Ms. Astha Tyagi (AOR Ms. Nishtha Tyagi), Adv. Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv. Mrigank Chaudhary.
- Counsel for Respondents (State): Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari.
- Counsel for defacto complainant‑respondent No.2: Mr. Sahil S.
- Core contention: Petitioners claim that a legal representative’s refusal to grant a No Objection Certificate (NOC) prevents execution of the sale deed; they argue that the predecessor executed a release deed relinquishing rights for adequate consideration.
Order Details
1. The Court held that the stand of CIDCO is essential for complete adjudication.
2. CIDCO is impleaded as a party respondent.
3. Petitioners are directed to file an amended memo of parties.
4. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari accepts notice on behalf of CIDCO.
5. CIDCO must file an affidavit within two weeks explaining its position.
6. CIDCO is specifically asked to address why it continues to insist on an NOC from the legal representative despite the predecessor’s release deed.
7. The matter is listed for further hearing on 22 September 2026.
Final Outcome
- CIDCO is now a respondent and must submit an explanatory affidavit within two weeks; the petitioner must amend the parties’ memorandum; the next hearing is set for 22‑09‑2026, ensuring the Court can resolve the NOC dispute.
Topics: Legal Proceedings, Land Development, No Objection Certificate