SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1288

A.M.AHMADI, SUHAS C.SEN, S.P.BHARUCHA
Ram Awatar Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Corporation Of Calcutta – Respondent


( 1 ) RESPONDENT 11 raised a construction at 174, Chittaranjan Avenue, Calcutta, which according to the Municipal Authorities was unauthorised. The Municipal Authorities, therefore, issued a notice under Section 416 of the Calcutta Municipal Act, 1951 (hereinafter called "the Act") to the owner as well as the occupiers of the said building to show cause why the unauthorised structure should not be demolished. In the meantime, the Municipal Authorities also posted guards at the site to ensure that there was no further unauthorised construction. Thereupon, Respondent 11, the owner of the building, filed Title Suit No. 1161 of 1977 challenging the validity of the said notice on a number of grounds and secured an ad interim ex parte injunction restraining the Corporation from interfering with the construction work. Under the protection of the said interim order the activity of construction was carried on. Subsequently, on 30/1/1978 the Municipal Authorities issued a notice under Ss. (1 of Section 414 of the Act for demolition of the unauthorised construction. Efforts were made to serve this notice on Respondent 11 but it is alleged that he was trying to evade service and as such the no








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top