Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A. S. Gadkari, Kamal Khata, JJ
Siesta Industrial & Trading Corporation – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ challenges demolition notices for pre-1962 structures. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners claim pre-datum assessment and permissions prove legality. (Para 3) |
| 3. bmc shows tikka, mr plan indicate post-datum illegal structures. (Para 4) |
| 4. court finds no direct proof of pre-datum structure existence. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. impugned notices and orders well-reasoned and valid. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. illegality incurable; demolish all unauthorized constructions. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 7. petitioners' documents fail to establish pre-datum legality. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 8. dismiss petition; deny stay extension. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
Judgment (Per : Kamal Khata, J) :-
1) By this Writ Petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners seek to quash and set aside seven impugned Notices dated 22nd December, 2022, as well as seven Speaking Orders dated 10th March, 2023, with respect to property situated at Bharat Coal Compound, Bail Bazar, Kurla West, Mumbai – 400070.
Brief facts.
2) The Petitioner No.1 is carrying on business in partnership from Bharat Coal Compound on land bearing Survey No.36, Hissa No.15, Old C.T.S. No.66 (Part) corresponding to new C.T.S. N
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
