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

1993 Supreme(Bom) 294

M.L.PENDSE, A.P.SHAH
Ramniklal Ratilal Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Y. A. Sathaye & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - SHAH A.P., J.:—This petition arises out of proceedings of declaration of surplus vacant land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”). Admittedly, the petitioner is the owner of the following two pieces of land, viz. land Survey Nos. 248, 247 (Pt.), 375 situated at Mulund admeasuring 1,15,160 Sq. Mtrs. (hereinafter referred to as “the Mulund land”) and land Survey Nos. 186 (Pt.), 187 (Pt.) and 189 (Pt.) situated at Ghatkopar admeasuring 13,764 Sq. Mtrs. (hereinafter referred to as “the Ghatkopar land”).

2. Before the Competent Authority, it was the contention of the petitioner that the said lands at Mulund and Ghatkopar have no independent means of access from any public road or street and no construction is permissible on the said lands under the Development Control Regulations of Greater Bombay and, therefore, the said lands are excluded from the definition of 'vacant land' by virtue of the provisions of sub-clause (1) of Clause (q) of section 2 of the said Act. It was also contended by the petitioner that there is unauthorised hutment upon the Ghatkopar land and, therefore, it is not a 'vacant land' as define



























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