Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A. S. Gadkari, Kamal Khata, JJ
Sukhshanti Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mr. Nishant M. Mahimtura Indian Inhabitant Residing At Chandan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kamal Khata, J.
1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks the following prayers:
“(a) that this Hon’ble Court may be please to issue a writ of mandamus/direction and/order of a like nature be issued against the Respondent Nos.3 and 4, after considering the legality and validity or otherwise thereof, directing the Respondent No.3 and 4 to demolish the unauthorized structure/shop as more particularly set out in “Exh-E”.
(b) that this Hon’ble Court direct the Respondent No.1 and 2 to restore the said flats No.1A and 2 in their original state.
(c) that a writ of mandamus/direction and/order of a like nature be issued against the Respondent No.3 and 4 to demolish all encroachment over the property of the Petitioner in violation of the provision of law.”
Brief facts that led to the Petition are as under:
2) The Petitioner is a Society situated at Peddar Road, an elite location in Mumbai. They complained to Respondent Nos.3 and 4 (BMC) that it’s member the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - owners of flat No. 2 (on the ground floor) have amalgamated the adjoining flat No.1A owned by a deceased member Dr. L Soneji. The illegalities they complained
The court held that the Respondents' unauthorized amalgamation of flats violated statutory obligations, leading to contempt findings against them and the BMC for failing to enforce compliance with co....
The court held the Respondents in contempt for violating court orders regarding unauthorized structural changes, emphasizing the BMC's duty to enforce compliance with its directives.
The court held Respondents guilty of contempt for violating court orders regarding unauthorized construction, emphasizing the BMC's duty to enforce compliance with its regulations.
The court emphasized the necessity for municipal authorities to enforce compliance with court orders and statutory obligations, holding individuals accountable for illegal structural alterations.
The Municipal Corporation's failure to comply with Court orders regarding illegal structures constitutes contempt, necessitating immediate action to uphold the rule of law.
The court established that unauthorized constructions cannot be regularized and that compliance with municipal regulations is mandatory for legality.
The court affirmed the necessity of preserving public spaces and the illegality of unauthorized constructions on reserved land, emphasizing strict adherence to zoning regulations.
The court highlighted the importance of adhering to building permissions and procedures outlined under municipal law in construction matters.
The court emphasized the necessity of proper notice and adherence to procedural safeguards in administrative actions affecting property rights, ruling the demolition illegal due to failure to follow ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
