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

1982 Supreme(Bom) 251

SHARAD MANOHAR
Syed Khuwaja Syed Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority – Respondent


JUDGMENT - SHARAD MANOHAR, J.:---This appeal from order has got to be allowed just for the asking. The simple facts are that there was a building at Grant Road which was in a dilapidated condition. It was acquired by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (hereunder referred to as the "Authority") under section 41 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter the "Act"). The occupants of the old building were entitled, as a matter of right to have the allotment of a suitable flat in the building to be newly constructed in the place of the old dilapidated building. As a matter of fact, under section 94 of the Act, an alternative accommodation is required to be given to the occupants even when the building is to be demolished and while the new building is under construction. But it is really speaking, not necessary to go into all those facts and provisions at this stage. It is enough here to state that admittedly, without the Authoritys active efforts the building itself decided to co-operate with the Authority and it crumbled down. The occupants had to fend for themselves for some roof over their head. The present petitioner who was the plain
















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