Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Abdul Aziz Bharmar – Appellant
Versus
Vinod Anand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges impleadment order over tdr rights. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. suit land tdr generated and utilized on adjoining land. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. tdr monetizable without transferring ownership rights. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. tdr loses immovable status upon detachment and use. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. no impleadment needed for tdr receiving land owner. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 6. no claim to flats from tdr-loaded development. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. impleadment set aside; claim tdr monetary value. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. The Petition raises an interesting issue of Plaintiff’s right to claim ownership in flats constructed on non-suit land owned by a third party by use of TDR generated from the suit land, in which Plaintiff claims ownership. The issue arises in the light of opposition by the owner of non-suit land to his impleadment to the suit. No doubt the TDR is generated from the suit land in which Plaintiff claims ownership, but is the TDR akin to immovable property and whether its utilization on another land would mean ‘transfer of right’ in suit land in favour of owner of non-suit land entitling the Plaintiff to run behind such owner
TDR detached from originating land and utilized elsewhere loses immovable property character and link thereto; claimant cannot seek ownership in constructed units on receiving land or implead its own....
The court held that the sale of Transferable Development Rights does not require registration under the Registration Act as it is treated as movable property, and inadequacy of consideration alone ca....
A Writ cannot create a legal right; it can only enforce an already established right. Entitlement under new regulations requires compliance with specific conditions, which were not met in this case.
Entitlement to Transferable Development Rights (TDR) arises only upon land surrender, not application submission, as per the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act.
A developer cannot claim benefits under new regulations without fulfilling the necessary conditions stipulated, and a writ cannot be issued to establish a non-crystallized legal right.
Notification permitting 75% TDR utilisation via premium payment upheld; complies with MRTP Act procedure, within rule-making powers under Section 22(m), not ultra vires or manifestly arbitrary, addre....
Point of Law : Right to property although is no longer a Fundamental Right after 42nd Amendment to the Constitution, it is constitutionally secured.
Notice under Section 35(3) IFA for MPFA vesting must be by authorised officer, served on true owner pre- or proximately to appointed day; invalid notice fails strict compliance, preventing land class....
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
