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

2025 Supreme(SC) 1988

J. B. PARDIWALA, K. V. VISWANATHAN
Jyoti Builders – Appellant
Versus
Chief Executive Officer – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Kavin Gulati, Sr. Adv. Mr. Anish Agarwal, AOR Mr. Yogesh Adhia, Adv. Mr. Pratik Chakma, Adv. Ms. Natasha Bagga, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Maurya, Adv. Ms. Pooja Kane, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Jain, Adv. Mr. Yashvardhan Singh, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Pallavi Sharma, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv. Mr. Bharat Jain, Adv. Mr. Purvesh Buttan, Adv. Mr. Karan Batura, AOR Mr. Prateek Narwar, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Vijay Adkine, Adv. Ms. Tuhina Kakkar, Adv. Mr. Himanshu Buttan, Adv. Ms. Prachi Bhutani, Adv. Mr. Abhikalp Pratap Singh, AOR Mr. Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, AOR Mr. B. Dhananjay, Adv. Ms. Srishty Pandey, Adv. Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Palash Singhai, AOR Mr. Harshal Sareen, Adv. Mr. Pragya Prakash Upadhyaya, Adv.

Table of Content
1. appeal arises from prior judicial orders. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. subject property characterized as slum area. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. acquisition history and prior agreements. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. rehabilitation activities undertaken. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. legality of orders from ceo-sra. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
6. legal standards for acquiring land. (Para 21 , 22)
7. judgment of the high court highlighted. (Para 23 , 24)
8. injunctions affecting redevelopment plans. (Para 25 , 26)
9. details about retaken legal positions. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)
10. legal analysis hinges on property rights. (Para 54 , 55 , 56)
11. conclusion drawn from legal arguments. (Para 70 , 71 , 72)

JUDGMENT

J.B. PARDIWALA, J. :

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal arises from the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Original Ordinary Civil Jurisdiction) dated 18.12.2024 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant herein seeking to challenge the orders passed by the respondent No. 1 herein dated 03.10.2022 and respondent No. 3 herein dated 07.10.2024 respectively came to be dismissed.

3. Over and above the challenge to the two orders referred to above, the app

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