Search Results for "Section 3(1)(b) Maharashtra Rent Control Act"

7 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 7 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

"Landmark Judgment on Property Rights and Public Welfare in Mumbai" "Balancing property ownership with the collective good under India's constitutional framework."

The Supreme Court examined whether Chapter VIII-A of the MHADA Act aligns with the principles of Article 39(b) of the Indian Constitution, which aims ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Writ Petition Under Article 227 Against Revisional Order Upholding Eviction Under Maharashtra Rent Control Act. Licensee Company Challenges Jurisdiction, Arguing Non-Applicability of Act Due to Paid-Up Capital Exceeding Rs. 1 Crore Under Section 3(1)(b).

Background: The matter involves a dispute between licensors (owners of a flat in Galaxy Apartments, Bandra) and a licensee company (petitioner no. 1) ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging MHADA Eviction Order in Slum Rehabilitation Case. Court upholds MHADA's jurisdiction to evict unauthorized occupants from transit accommodation under Section 3M of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Re-development) Act, 1971.

The judgment pertains to a writ petition filed by 16 individuals who were occupants of transit accommodation in a building known as 'Sukh Sadan' in Go...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Landlord-Tenant Dispute — Tenant Ordered to Vacate After Expiry of 30-Year Lease. The court upheld the decree for possession based on valid wills and the terms of the registered Kabulayat, rejecting the tenant's challenge to the landlord's title.

The case involves a second appeal before the Bombay High Court arising from a suit for possession of a house and appurtenant land. The suit property w...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Adjudicates Writ Petitions Challenging Mandatory Pre-Deposit under Section 35F of Central Excise Act, 1944. The court examined whether the mandatory deposit requirement violated Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India.

The High Court of Karnataka heard a batch of writ petitions filed by several assessees, including Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Prestige Garde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Refusal to Frame Preliminary Issue in Rent Act Proceedings. Maintainability of Application Under Section 13A(2) of Bombay Rents Act Involves Mixed Questions of Law and Fact and Cannot Be Decided as Preliminary Issue.

The case involves two writ petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging an order dated 7th October 2004 passed by the competent authori...