Search Results for "Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensat...
Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Sui...
Supreme Court Upholds Refusal to Eschew Proof Affidavit in Probate Proceedings. ...
Supreme Court Allows Agriculturists' Appeal for Enhanced Compensation; Condones ...

Search Results for "Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976"

400 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 400 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Directs MHADA to Pay Compensation for Land Acquired 36 Years Ago Without Award — Violation of Articles 14, 21, and 300-A of the Constitution. Non-payment of compensation for compulsory acquisition under Section 93(5) of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, held arbitrary and unconstitutional; court orders payment with interest at 9% per annum from date of possession.

1 Aug 2024

The petitioner, Yusuf Yunus Kantharia, was the owner of a plot of land measuring 979 sq. metres in Dharavi, Mumbai, along with a chawl known as Kantha...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Entry Tax on Industrial Townships — Industrial Townships Can Be Treated as 'Local Area' Under Entry 52 List II. Inclusion of industrial townships in definition of 'local area' for entry tax is constitutionally valid and does not violate Article 243-Q.

4 Nov 2022

The Supreme Court considered a batch of appeals challenging the validity of entry tax levied on goods entering industrial townships under the Orissa E...

High Court

Bombay High Court Disposes of Challenge to Sections 17(2) and 32(1) Proviso of MMRDA Act by Consent. Land Acquisition by MMRDA Under Challenge: Petitioners Allege Unconstitutional Provisions in MMRDA Act, 1974.

15 Nov 2019

The Bombay High Court heard and disposed of a group of matters comprising Writ Petition No. 841 of 2012, Public Interest Litigation No. 3 of 2011, and...

High Court

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.

30 Jul 2019

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

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows PIL Against APMC for Illegal Construction Without Development Permission Under MRTP Act. Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Not a Local Authority Under Section 2(15) of MRTP Act, Hence Not Exempt from Section 44.

3 Aug 2017

This Public Interest Litigation was filed by Goroba Pandurang Gadekar against the State of Maharashtra, Latur Municipal Corporation, Agricultural Prod...

High Court

High Court of Bombay Issues Judgment on Official Trustee's Petition Against MHADA Notice and Redevelopment Approvals — Matter Concerns Temple Property and Involves Heritage and Coastal Zone Regulations. The petition seeks setting aside of notice under Section 95-A of MHADA Act, building plans, and TDR certificate, while developer relies on Memorandum of Understanding and court orders.

6 Mar 2014

...

High Court

Bombay High Court Hears Public Interest Litigation Petition Challenging Construction of Residential Building and Public Parking Lot under DCR and MRTP Act — Court Examines Legality of Approvals and Concessions Granted by Municipal Commissioner. The Court Considers Whether Circular Restricting Public Parking Lots to Four Floors Overrides Provisions of DCR 33(24) and Implications of Notices under Sections 51 and 53(1) of MRTP Act.

13 May 2013

The Public Interest Litigation petition filed in 2012 before the Bombay High Court challenged the legality of approvals and construction of a 56‑sto...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Validity of Incentive FSI for Redevelopment of Cessed Buildings in Mumbai — Directs Strict Compliance with Safety and Environmental Norms. The court held that DCR 33(7) is valid but must be implemented with safeguards to prevent urban disruption and protect the right to life under Article 21.

17 Oct 2005

The judgment arises from a writ petition filed by three citizens of Mumbai challenging the validity of Development Control Regulation 33(7) which gran...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Examines Appeals Concerning Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant, Addressing Safety and Regulatory Measures Under Atomic Energy Act, 1962. The Court Deliberates on Balancing National Energy Policy with Public Apprehensions Stemming from Past Nuclear Incidents.

1 Jan 1970

The case centers on appeals related to the establishment of a nuclear power plant at Kudankulam in Tamil Nadu. The judgment begins by acknowledging th...

High Court

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Delivers Common Judgment in Batch of Writ Petitions Against State of Maharashtra and Forest Authorities Concerning Land Rights. The Petitioners Challenge Actions of the Revenue and Forest Departments Regarding Classification and Possession of Lands.

1 Jan 1970

...

5 6 7 8 9

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)