MRIDULA BHATKAR
PARISAR – Appellant
Versus
Pune Municipal Corporation – Respondent
1. Heard. Admit. By consent of parties appeal is heard finally at the stage of admission.
2. Second Appeal is filed against the judgment and Order dated 30.6.2011 of the First Appeal Court, Pune in Civil Appeal No.293 of 2008 thereby confirming the judgment and decree passed in R.C.S No.725 of 2000 passed by the trial Court.
3. The appellant is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 working for the conservation of nature and environment. The respondent is a Corporation established under the Bombay Provincial Corporations Act, 1949. (Hereinafter called as “BPMC ACT”) The respondent-Corporation took a decision to construct new roads running parallel to river Mutha in the heart of the Pune city. The suit road is one of such roads and its construction started in the year 2000. The said decision was detrimental to the existence of river Mutha, so appellant society filed a suit for declaration that the Corporation has no right to construct road or structures in Mutha river bed and for perpetual injunction. In the suit the appellants have also prayed for other directions to be given to the Corporation to conserve Mutha river bed and green belts surrounde
Vijay Krishna Kumbhar Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.
K.Ramadas Shenoy Vs. The Chief Officers, Town Municipal Council, Udipi & ors
Smt. Fatima Joao Vs. Village Panchayat of Merces and Anr.
Kolhapur Zilla Rajya Abkari Parvana Dharak Samajik Seva Sangh Vs. Kolhapur Municipal Corporation
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.