Case Note & Summary
The appeal before the Bombay High Court arose from interim orders in a redevelopment suit concerning three dilapidated buildings known as Trilok – ‘A’, Trilok – ‘B’ and Trilok – ‘C’ constructed in 1965 on CTS Nos. C/1651, C/1653 and C/1654 of Village Bandra, Mumbai Suburban District, situated at 313, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050. The buildings comprised 76 flats and 20 garages. The flat purchasers formed and got Bandra Trilok Co-operative Housing Society Limited registered under Registration No.BOM/HSG/3619 of 1972. The appellant family held Garage No.12 in Trilok ‘B’, originally purchased by their father Keval Mishra in June 1971 from one P. S. Ajwaini. The father had also owned Flat No.B-37 but sold it, retaining only the garage. After the father's death in 1984 and mother Beena Mishra's death on 18th August 2012, the appellants are the only legal heirs. The property was originally owned by Hardevi Rajpal, who executed an agreement for lease dated 18th October 1961 in favour of United Building Corporation, which constructed the buildings. By a registered deed of conveyance dated 11th August 2005, Hardevi Rajpal conveyed the suit property in favour of the developer, Shree Ahuja Properties Pvt. Ltd. In 2007, Trilok Society filed L.C. Suit No.164 of 2007 before the Bombay City Civil Court complaining that the appellants’ mother had illegally converted the suit garage into a shop and was carrying on commercial activities, seeking a declaration of illegality, injunction, and directions to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM). The MCGM issued a notice dated 23rd May 2013 under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and by order dated 24th July 2013 held the change of user of the suit garage from car parking to commercial illegal and directed reinstatement as a garage. Appellant No.1 challenged the notice and order by filing L.C. Suit No.1266 of 2014 before the Bombay City Civil Court at Dindoshi; these suits were pending. Due to the old and dilapidated condition of the buildings, the society members decided to redevelop through the developer. Out of 76 flats and 20 garages, all except 7 flats and 5 garages were handed over, and the developer was paying approximately Rs.60 lakhs per month to displaced flat owners. The developer filed Suit No.760 of 2019 with Notice of Motion No.1318 of 2019 seeking directions to vacate and hand over premises, offering alternative residential flats on the first floor equivalent to occupied area plus 38%, and stating it would provide the area even if the change of user suits were lost. The appellants took out Notice of Motion No.1518 of 2019 seeking restraint against interference with possession and restoration of water connection. By orders dated 3rd May 2021, the learned Single Judge disposed of Notice of Motion No.1318 of 2019 in favour of the developer by appointing the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay in respect of the garage for demolition in furtherance of redevelopment, and rejected the appellants’ Notice of Motion No.1518 of 2019. The appellants challenged both orders in the present appeal. The provided text ends before the parties’ submissions and the final ruling, so the court's analysis, ratio decidendi, and final decision are not available in the excerpt.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Unauthorized Change of User - Garage Used as Shop Declared Illegal - Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Section 351 - The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai issued notice dated 23rd May 2013 under Section 351 and by order dated 24th July 2013 held the change of user of the suit garage from car parking to commercial illegal and directed reinstatement as garage. The appellant challenged the notice and order by filing L.C. Suit No.1266 of 2014 before Bombay City Civil Court, which was pending at the time of appeal. Held that the Court noted the MCGM's finding of illegality in the context of redevelopment dispute, though final ruling not available in provided text (Paras 1.3, 2.7-2.8). B) Co-operative Society Law - Redevelopment of Dilapidated Society Property - Non-Cooperative Member's Rights - Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 - The three buildings constructed in 1965 were in dilapidated condition; society members decided redevelopment through developer; all but seven flat owners and five garage holders handed over possession, and developer paid compensation to displaced members. The developer offered alternative residential flat on first floor with area equivalent to occupied area plus 38%, even if change of user suits were lost. The Court noted that appellants were the only remaining non-cooperative garage occupants causing inconvenience, and that Single Judge appointed Court Receiver for demolition (Paras 1.4-1.8, 2.9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Single Judge's orders dated 3 May 2021 appointing Court Receiver and rejecting Appellants' Notice of Motion were correct; whether Appellants are entitled to continue occupying suit garage in light of MCGM order under Section 351 MMC Act.
Law Points
- Change of user from garage to commercial is illegal under Section 351 of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act
- 1888
- appointment of Court Receiver for demolition in furtherance of redevelopment
- redevelopment of old dilapidated society buildings
- non-cooperative members can be compelled to vacate
- alternative accommodation offered to garage occupants
