Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

WRIT PETITION NO.739 OF 2021

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
Admin
2026-11-12 13:10:13
  • 143
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

WRIT PETITION NO.739 OF 2021

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (BOM) (08) 77

Writ Petition No.739 of 2021 with Writ Petition No.1023 of 2021, Writ Petition No.2454 of 2022, Writ Petition No.2368 of 2022, Writ Petition No.2457 of 2022

2022-08-29

R.D. Dhanuka, M.G. Sewlikar

2022:BHC-OS:7064-DB

Vineet Naik, Kunal Dwarkadas, Sukand Kulkarni, Shailesh Mahimturai, Zal Andhyarujina, Ayaz Bilawala, Yogesh Gaikwad, Kunal Bhanage, Akshay Pawar, Anish Khandekar, Atul Damle, Yashodeep Deshmukh, Vandana Mahadik, Jyoti Chavan, Himanushu Takke, Uma Palsuldesai, Amit Shastri, Shamrao B. Gore, Darshit Jain, Divya D. Jain, Dileep Satale

Pankaj Unit No. 1 Housing Development Company Private Limited; Pankaj Unit No. 2 Housing Development Company Private Limited; Samartha Development Corporation; Oshiwara Land Development Company Private Limited; Mr. Hasmukh Dipchand Gardi; The Samarth Nagar Lokhandwala Complex Co-operative Housing Societies Association Ltd.; Apna Ghar (East) CHS Association Ltd.; Apna Ghar (West) CHS Association Ltd.

The State of Maharashtra through Additional Chief Secretary, Revenue & Forest Department; Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division at Mumbai; Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai; Chief Engineer (Development Plan) Mumbai Municipal Corporation; The Tahsildar, Andheri; Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited; Oshiwara Land Development Company Private Limited; Pankaj Unit No. 1 Housing Development Company Private Limited; Pankaj Unit No. 2 Housing Development Company Private Limited; Samartha Development Corporation

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions concerning land rights and development in Oshiwara village, Mumbai

Judgment Excerpts

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel for the respective respondents waive service. During the period between 2nd October 1860 to 1948, by a kowl/grant dated 2nd October 1860, the Principal Collector of Konkan (on behalf of the East India Company) granted inter alia the entire village Oshiwara, including Survey No.41, admeasuring 723 acres and 30 gunthas in favour of the predecessors-in-title of Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited (Respondent no.6), without the requirement to pay land revenue. On 4th January 1952, the Salsette Estates (Land Revenue Exemption Abolition), 1951 came into force. On 15th April 1964, the Mamlatdar, Andheri conducted an enquiry under Section 4 of the Salsette Estates Act

Procedural History

Batch of writ petitions heard together; rule issued returnable forthwith; reserved on 5 July 2022; pronounced on 29 August 2022.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 1956:
  • Indian Partnership Act, 1932:
  • Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960:
  • Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888:
  • Salsette Estates (Land Revenue Exemption Abolition), 1951: Section 4
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
land grant kowl Oshiwara Salsette Estates Act salt pans housing development writ petition Bombay High Court

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Hears Appeal Against Conviction Under Section 302 IPC and Questions Non-Examination of Key Witnesses. The non-examination of the first informant and nephew, who were crucial to the last seen together and discovery of body, was held ... 2026-11-13 06:59:00
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petitions Challenging TET Qualification Requirement for Teacher Appointments in Maharashtra. The court upheld the validity of the Government Resolution dated 25.03.2024 making TET qualification mandatory for appointment of... 2026-11-13 06:58:59
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition murder acquittal natural justice compensation Jurisdiction Land Acquisition burden of proof limitation circumstantial evidence
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

High Court Dismisses State's Writ Petition Against Tribunal's Order for Appointment of Exc...

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Enforcement Directorate Actions in Multiple Writ Petitions...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Limitation Dispute Over Civil Works Contract. The Court fou...

Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement of Employees in Public Service — Validity of...

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Process in Forest Areas While Ensuring Compliance with Fore...

Lost Your Password?