Wed. Aug 17th, 2022
0 0
Read Time:4 Minute, 7 Second

MUMBAI: A day after the Bombay high court dismissed an appeal filed by 12 row-house owners to prevent redevelopment of an old multi-storey building of their society and declined to continue with the stay on the project, operational for five years, the Supreme Court ordered a status quo in the matter.
The HC on July 20 had said, “It is very difficult to see how bungalow owners can get an order that effectively compels fellow members of the same society to live in increasingly degraded conditions.’’
The bungalow owners went to the Supreme Court the next day with a special leave petition. On July 21, a three Judge bench of Chief Justice of India N V Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Hima Kohli heard senior counsel Shyam Diwan who mentioned the matter and granted a status quo. The relief to the bungalow owners from the SC continues till July 28 when the matter will be heard next.
The bungalow owners had filed a suit in 2016 against BMC, executive engineer building proposals, a cooperative housing society in Ghatkopar and a developer. In December 2018, a single Judge bench passed an interim order dismissing the bungalow owners’ plea to restrain any redevelopment which could disturb their “exclusive possession” of an open space or rear garden till a compound wall. Aggrieved, they had filed an appeal in 2019.
A bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Gauri Godse on July 20 noted that bungalow owners’ “real contest’’ is with the society, which owns the entire plot of 4,187 sq m, and the developer. The HC judgment copy available on Monday said the bungalow owners through their counsel Mayur Khandeparkar claimed before the HC exclusive rights to the garden, the portion that separates six row houses from the larger building.
The HC, after hearing senior counsel Pravin Samdani for the society and Aspi Chinoy for the developer, said the bungalow owners “have their separate row houses, structures of ground plus two”. At the rear stands the building which “has become dilapidated over time”. The HC said “fight is over the ‘gardens’ behind the row houses”.
Though the bungalow owners say they have no objection to the redevelopment so long as it doesn’t affect their garden, the HC said “under the present regulations, re-development will necessarily affect those open spaces. The fight is therefore between the narrower and very private claims of the plaintiffs and the housing conditions of considerably more members…This becomes a question of a decision in equity.’’
The bungalow owners say the garden area was theirs for nearly 50 years and protested as it would be lost during redevelopment.
Samdani had submitted that the existence of a compound wall does not give exclusive legal rights to any person on either side of it.
Khandeparkar relied on the house owner’s agreements under Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act (MOFA) and said it survives the execution of conveyance in favour of society. “We are unable to accept Khandeparker’s formulation,’’ said the bench. The issues are now to be agitated before the SC on Thursday.

Source link

For more news update stay with actp news

Android App

Facebook

Twitter

Dailyhunt

Share Chat

Telegram

Koo App

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: