Sudhir M. Khandwala Adult vs Municipal Corporation of Greater ) Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai ) (Summons to be served on the ) Municipal Commissioner

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2009 Supreme(Bom) 1737

SWATANTER KUMAR, S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
Sudhir M. Khandwala Adult – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater ) Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai ) (Summons to be served on the ) Municipal Commissioner – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:V.A. Thorat, Senior Advocate, a/w P.J. Thorat, K.K. Singhvi, Senior Advocate, a/w Mrs. V.S. Gharapure for the Mumbai Municipal Corporation, R5 & 6, J.G. Reddy i/b Utangale & Co. for Respondent No.4. N.H. Seervai, Senior Advocate, a/w R.N. Narula and Anuj Narula i/b M/s. J.Naruyla & Associate, R7, F.E. D’itre, Senior Advocate, a/w. Ms. Rajani Iyer, Senior Advocate, and Birendra Saraf i/b Y.N. Adhia, Ms.Geeta Shastri, Assistant Government Pleader, Sanjay Jain i/b Nityoah Sunil, S.U. Kamdar a/w Mr. N.M. Shah for the Petitioner, Shekhar Ingavale, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State. K.K. Singhvi, Senior Advocate, a/w Mrs.V.S. Gharapure for the Mumbai Municipal Corporation, Advocates.

Judgment :

1. Rule in all the Writ Petitions. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties,

petitions are heard finally.

2. These Writ Petitions and Public Interest Litigations were heard together. Although, some of the points in them are common, it would be necessary to refer to the facts in each of these Writ Petitions. However, majority of them involve the common issue, namely, unauthorized works, irregularities and illegalities in construction of buildings and the power of the Planning and Municipal authorities to regularize such acts of Builders and Developers.

I) WRIT PETITION NO. 1077 OF 2007

3. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner Sudhir Khandwala has approached this Court on the basis that he is residing presently in South Bombay but he is a purchaser of Flat Nos.1004A and 1004B, 10th Floor, Gaurav Gagan Building constructed in Kandivali (West), Mumbai 400067.

4. It is his case that the Respondent No.1 is the Mumbai Municipal Corporation which is a body corporate incorporated under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter referred to for short as “MMC Act, 1888”). Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are its Officers. Respondent No.4 is the Slum Rehabilitation

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2009 Supreme(Bom) 1737

SWATANTER KUMAR, S.C.DHARMADHIKARISudhir M. Khandwala Adult – AppellantVersusMunicipal Corporation of Greater ) Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai ) (Summons to be served on the ) Municipal Commissioner – Respondent

SWATANTER KUMAR, S.C.DHARMADHIKARI
Sudhir M. Khandwala Adult – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater ) Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai ) (Summons to be served on the ) Municipal Commissioner – Respondent