Search Results for "repairs"

516 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 516 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Summary Eviction Order Against 80-Year-Old Tenant in MHADA Redevelopment Dispute. Petitioner's Right to Alternate Accommodation Under Section 95A of MHADA Act Upheld as Board Failed to Provide Permanent Rehabilitation Before Eviction.

The petitioner, Sugrabai Gulam Abas Tambawala, an 80-year-old housewife, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challeng...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition in Property Dispute Between Near Relations — Upholds Concurrent Findings of Courts Below. Adverse Possession Claim Fails as Petitioner Failed to Prove Hostile Possession and Ouster of True Owner.

The dispute pertained to a property tussle between near relations. The petitioner, M/s Jwel Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., claimed title by adverse possession ov...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Against Municipal Corporation in Tenancy Dispute — No Interim Injunction Granted as Appellants Failed to Establish Prima Facie Case of Tenancy. Court Held That Mere Payment of Taxes Does Not Confer Tenancy Rights and Corporation's Title as Owner Remains Unchallenged.

The appeal arises from an order dated 20th September 2014 passed by the City Civil Court, Mumbai, dismissing the Notice of Motion No.2333 of 2014 in L...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes MHADA Order in Redevelopment Dispute — Upholds Developer's Right to Fair Hearing. Section 95A of MHADA Act, 1976 Requires Compliance with Natural Justice Before Revoking Development Rights.

The petitioners, M/s Darshan Jayant Builders (a partnership firm) and its partner Pritesh M. Jain, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Cons...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Dispute Over Notice Under Section 478 of BPMC Act. Repair Work by Appellant Not Covered by Section 478 as It Was Not Urgent or Necessary for Safety.

The appellant, Ashok Ambadas Gangane, filed two second appeals against the respondents, M/s. Shubhamangal Builders and Others, and Pune Municipal Corp...