Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
A. S. Chandurkar, J.
Kishore Ramalu Telang v. Municipal Commissioner Nagpur
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff challenges the notice for corrective action under statutory law. (Para 3 , 4 , 7) |
| 2. arguments presented on the maintainability and enforcement of the notice. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. validity of notice under statutory terms determined by court. (Para 10 , 12 , 16) |
| 4. court asserts jurisdiction to evaluate statutory compliance and procedural fairness. (Para 17) |
| 5. final decision to remand the case based on jurisdiction evaluation. (Para 19) |
1. Heard. Admit on the following substantial question of law:
Whether the bar under S.149 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 applies in the present case when the notice issued under S.53 of the said Act is challenged on the ground that the period prescribed therein falls short of the statutory period and is therefore a nullity?
2. Considering the issue involved the learned counsel for the parties have been heard on aforesaid substantial question of law.
3. The appellant is the original plaintiff who had been issued notice dated 18.11.2010 under the provisions of S.53(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short the said Act). As per said notice certain deficiencies in the user of the
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
