ARUN MISHRA, MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR
Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai – Appellant
Versus
Hiraman Sitaram Deorukhar – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The facts in short giving rise to the present appeal indicate that way back in the year 1967 the disputed property was reserved for a garden in the development plan, prepared under the provisions of Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (in short 'the MRTP Act'). The said development plan was revised in the year 1991-1992. The reservation of the disputed property was further continued for the purpose of a garden. On 5.10.1992, the respondent No's 2 to 12 and deceased named Sitaram V. Deorukhkar entered into an agreement for sale dated 5.10.1992, in favour of respondent No. 13. On 18.10.1992, the power of attorney had been executed in favour of respondent no. 13 to institute a suit in relation to the property. Power of attorney served a notice for purchase under Section 127 of the MRTP Act on 25.07.2007. The Municipal Corporation gave its approval to initiate the purchase proceedings of the land. On 19.10.2007, Improvement Committee, passed resolution No. 126 and recommended to the corporation to acquire the land of Village Borivali reserved for public purpose i.e. for the garden. On 21.01.2008, a proposa
Animal and Environment Legal Defence Fund v. Union of India & Ors.
Bangalore Medical Trust vs. B.S. Muddappa & Ors.
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath & Ors.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.
Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardhichand & Ors.
Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar & Ors.
T. Damodhar Rao & Ors. v. The Special Officer, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad & Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.