SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 33811

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA, J
Vijay Kumar Garg – Appellant
Versus
Indore Municipal Corporation – Respondent


Advocates:
,Amol Shrivastava

ORDER

01. The petitioner has filed the present petition alleging that the respondent No.3 has raised the illegal construction on MOS area contrary to the sanction map, therefore, the Municipal Corporation Indore be directed to demolish the illegal construction raised by the respondent No.3. (VIVEK RUSIA)

02. The petitioner has submitted the representation to the Commissioner but the same has not been decided till date, therefore, the petitioner is also seeking direction to the respondent to decide the pending representation.

03. In the M.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred as "Act of 1956") there is a specific provision by way of Section 307(5) whereby any person who is aggrieved by the illegal construction can approach the District Court to challenge the same. Sub-Section (5) of Section 307 of Act of 1956 is reproduced below:

(5) Nothing in this section shall affect then right of the Corporation or any other person to apply to the District Court for an injunction for the removal or alteration of any building on the ground that it contravenes any provision of this Act or the byelaws made thereunder, but if the building is one in respect of which plans

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top