Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, M/s. Mehul Realtors Private Ltd., as owner/landlord of property bearing C.T.S. nos.1211, 1211/1 to 8 with structure known as 'Pandya House' at Sarojini Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai, filed a Writ Petition seeking directions against Respondent nos.1 to 3 (Mumbai Municipal Corporation and its officers) to take immediate steps for vacating and demolishing the dilapidated structure, specifically room premises nos.1 and 11. There was no dispute regarding the dilapidated condition of the building, and the Corporation had issued notices since 2008. Out of 14 structures/rooms, 13 were already vacated by occupants through settlement with the Petitioner. Room no.11 was also demolished pursuant to settlement. The only remaining dispute was over room no.1, which Respondent nos.4 and 5 claimed to be in joint possession along with their sister Chandrika. Suits were pending in the Small Causes Court filed by Respondent no.4 for a declaration of tenancy over the room and appurtenant land, and by Respondent no.5 in Suit no.611 of 2011 regarding room no.15 and terrace area. The Court noted that room no.15 had already been demolished and was not being dealt with. The matter was adjourned for settlement, and Respondent no.4 expressed willingness to vacate within four weeks on condition that his rights and contentions in the civil suit be kept open. The Petitioner was willing to provide permanent alternate accommodation on tenancy basis in lieu of room no.1. Respondent no.5 appeared in person and opposed settlement, raising grievances already pleaded in the pending suits. The Court held that disputed questions of fact raised by Respondent no.5 could not be gone into at this stage, given the dilapidated condition of the building. The Court directed that Respondent no.4 shall vacate room no.1 within four weeks, and the Petitioner shall provide alternate accommodation on tenancy basis within that period. The Municipal Corporation was directed to demolish the building after vacation. The rights and contentions of the parties in the pending suits were kept open, and the Petitioner was to abide by the decision in those suits. The Petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Dilapidated Building - Demolition - Municipal Corporation Notice - The Court directed the Municipal Corporation to demolish the dilapidated building 'Pandya House' after the owner settled with all occupants except one, subject to the occupant vacating within four weeks and the owner providing alternate accommodation on tenancy basis, while keeping the rights and contentions in the pending Small Causes Court suits open for adjudication (Paras 2-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Mumbai Municipal Corporation should be directed to demolish a dilapidated building despite pending tenancy suits filed by occupants claiming rights over the premises.
Final Decision
The Court directed Respondent no.4 to vacate room no.1 within four weeks; the Petitioner to provide permanent alternate accommodation on tenancy basis within the same period; the Municipal Corporation to demolish the building after vacation; rights and contentions of parties in pending suits kept open; Petition disposed of.
Law Points
- Dilapidated building
- Municipal Corporation notice
- Demolition
- Alternate accommodation
- Pending tenancy suits
- Small Causes Court
- Consent terms
