AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Amar Krishna Ray – Appellant
Versus
Abhoy Auddy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
1. The present application has been preferred by the petitioner challenging three orders, being order 72 dated 19th June 2015, order no. 73 dated 30th June 2015 and order no 74 dated 16th September 2015, passed by the chairman, Municipal Building Tribunal, Kolkata, in B.T. Appeal No. 7 of 2008.
2. Petitioners contended that the petitioners are the owner of premises no. 90A and 90C, Ananda Palit Road, by virtue of purchase through registered deed of conveyance. The opposite party no. 1 herein is the owner of premises no. 90B Anand Palit Road, and it is alleged that the opposite party no. 1 herein has made unauthorised construction in the said premises being premises no 90 B. It is further contended on behalf of the petitioners that the said premises and the premises belonged to the petitioners, were partitioned in the year 1933 and according to the partition plan the said premises no. 90B having an area of 1 cottah 3 chittak of land, is butted and bounded as per schedule of the partition plan. The present opposite party no. 1 became owner of the said premises No. 90B by way of a deed of conveyance dated 5th March, 2003.
3. Petitioners alleged that the
Goka Raju Ranga Raju Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1981) 3 SCC 132
Hindustan Zinc Limited Vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Limited
Jai Sing and others Vs. Municipal corporation of Delhi and another reported in (2010) 9 SCC 385
Susama Saha Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation reported in 2015 (5) CHN 309
The Special Officer lacked jurisdiction to regularize unauthorized construction under the KMC Act, rendering the action null and emphasizing the fundamental nature of jurisdiction in legal proceeding....
The court emphasized the importance of planned development and the need to address unauthorized constructions. It also highlighted the right of the petitioners, as owners, to be heard before the orde....
A decision by an authority impugned in a writ petition cannot be sustained if it fails to follow the directions in an earlier writ petition passed by a competent court.
The Tribunal has the authority to regularize minor violations of building regulations, and the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction does not extend to re-evaluating factual determinations made by lo....
Section 406 of Kerala Municipality Act reads as Demolition or alteration of building work unlawfully commenced, carried on or completed.
The court emphasized that it cannot go into disputed questions of fact while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and highlighted the finality of orders and the bar on j....
Statutory provisions governing unauthorized constructions must be adhered to by municipal authorities when issuing orders or taking action against such constructions.
Civil suits challenging demolition orders for unauthorized construction are not maintainable where specific provisions of the DMC Act provide for an appellate forum, reinforcing the jurisdictional li....
The duty of municipal officers to take action against illegal and unauthorized structures, and the need for a well-considered approach by the Civil Court in dealing with applications for temporary in....
Municipal officers have a duty to take action against illegal and unauthorized structures, as per the provisions of the law and government directives.
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.