Search Results for "Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888"

407 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 407 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Dismisses Appeal in Demolition Notice Case Under Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Due to Insufficient Evidence of Structure Legality. Plaintiffs Fail to Prove Authorization and Compliance with Municipal Permissions

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay heard a first appeal filed by appellants (original plaintiffs) against an order of the City Civil Court, Bombay...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Corporation's Appeal in Stop-Work Notice Case Due to Vagueness and Non-Adjudication. Notice Under Section 354A of Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Quashed as It Failed to Describe Nature of Construction and No Order Was Passed After Reply.

The appeal was filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai challenging an order dated 8 December 2009 passed by the City Civil Court, which q...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in Assault on Public Servant Case Due to Material Contradictions in Witness Testimony. Conviction under Section 332 IPC set aside as prosecution witnesses gave conflicting accounts of who landed the fist blow, rendering them unreliable.

The case arises from a criminal revision application challenging the conviction of Azharali Jaferali Qureshi (the applicant) under Section 332 read wi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Tenant's Appeal Against Refusal of Injunction in BMC Demolition Case - Tenant's Right to Challenge Demolition Notice Under Section 354 of MMC Act Not Dependent on Impleading Purchaser-Owners.

The appellant, Arun Jakson James, a tenant in possession of suit premises, challenged a notice issued under Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corpor...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Property Tax Pre-Deposit Condition for Appeal Entertainment Under Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. Pre-deposit under Section 217(2)(d) is mandatory for entertaining appeal, and interim relief cannot be granted without compliance.

The petitioners, Fleet Fastners Private Limited and another, challenged two orders: (1) an order dated 13 July 2011 by the Municipal Corporation of Gr...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Policy for Section 351 Notices Under MCGM Act as Moot Due to Prior Challenge by BSE. The court held that the petitioner lacked locus standi and the issues were already pending before a Single Bench in a related writ petition.

The petitioner, Dr. V. Aditya Srinivas, an office bearer of BSE Brokers' Forum, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Bombay High Court seek...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Chief Minister's Permission for Development on Recreational Ground in Public Interest Litigation. Section 47 MRTP Act Appeal Allowed Without Proper Application of Mind and Contrary to Development Plan Reservation.

The judgment arises from a public interest litigation filed by residents living around the Cooperage plot in Mumbai, represented by the Oval Cooperage...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition by Occupants Challenging Redevelopment Scheme Under DCR 33(7) — Majority Consent and Sanctioned Plans Upheld. Court held that the redevelopment scheme was validly sanctioned and the petitioners' objections were not sufficient to stall the project.

The petitioners, seventeen occupants of residential tenements in Dalal Estate, Mumbai Central, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal by Housing Society in Property Dispute Over Water Connection and Construction. Developer's Agreement to Provide Water Connection and Restrict Construction Held Binding.

The case involves two cross-appeals arising from a judgment and decree dated 31st March 2004 in L.C. Suit No. 786 of 2004. The appellants in First App...