Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
FARHAN P.DUBASH
Sohag Bipin Dalal – Appellant
Versus
Mahendra Shantilal Dalal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interim applications seek redevelopment directions amid title dispute (Para 1) |
| 2. timeline of deaths, suits, probate, injunctions, redevelopment (Para 2) |
| 3. defendants claim redevelopment benefits via residency and wills (Para 3) |
| 4. plaintiffs demand administrator, deposit pending probate (Para 4) |
| 5. balance favors permanent residents for transit rent; corpus deposited (Para 5) |
| 6. defendants execute paaa, get transit; reserve plaintiffs' bedroom (Para 6) |
ORDER :
FARHAN P. DUBASH, J.
1. The present two Interim Applications:
1.1 By this common order, this Court proposes to dispose of the present two Interim Applications. The first Interim Application has been taken out by Defendant nos. 1 and 8 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Defendants”), whereas the second Interim Application has been taken out by Plaintiff No. 1A (hereinafter referred to as “the said Plaintiff”).
1.2 The subject matter of both the Interim Applications pertains to Flat No. 301, situated in a building known as “Mount Pleasant”, of Palmera Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the said Society”), located at 16, Narayan Dabholkar Marg, Mumbai – 400006 (hereinafter referred to as
In redevelopment of disputed flats pending title suits, permanent occupants as society members may execute agreements and receive transit rent for hardship; deposit corpus in court; reserve bedroom i....
The court established that a landlord's bonafide requirement for premises can justify eviction, provided the tenant cannot demonstrate greater hardship, and that the validity of a consent decree rega....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory requirements of Section 95-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, and the need to comply with the terms and con....
Redevelopment scheme – Eviction of tenant - Agreement with the Petitioners regarding alternate permanent rehab premises proposed to be allotted on tenancy basis.
Breach of contractual obligations in housing redevelopment led to consumer compensation under the Consumer Protection Act.
Court ruled that temporary injunctions can enforce development agreements even against minority occupants obstructing redevelopment, especially when prior claims against obstruction were dismissed on....
The complaint was dismissed for lack of evidence supporting claims of coercion and non-entitlement to additional flats, affirming the definition of consumer under the Consumer Protection Act.
Court upheld the rights of a bona fide member of a cooperative society to her originally entitled flat, reinforcing judicial authority to rectify unfair membership disputes.
Builders must not impose unfair charges or conditions that undermine consumer rights, ensuring timely possession and compliance with agreements.
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
