MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Supreme Court Directs Rehabilitation or Compensation for Longstanding Occupants

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that underscores the rights of citizens over their longstanding occupied properties, the Supreme Court today mandated the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to “consider the claim of the appellants in terms of the Town Planning Scheme either for rehabilitation or payment of compensation.”

The apex court’s decision comes in the wake of a protracted legal battle that began in 2001, concerning the rights of the appellants who have been in possession of their property since 1976. The property, which has been a subject of multiple legal notices and suits, is now due for rehabilitation or compensation as per the provisions of the Town Planning Scheme.

The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Rajesh Bindal, overturned the High Court’s decision that had ruled against the appellants. The Supreme Court observed that the claim of the appellants is genuine and deserves consideration, noting, “admittedly, the appellants were found to be in possession of the property in dispute from the year 1976 onwards.”

The Court has set a deadline for the Corporation to resolve the matter, ordering that “the needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order.”

This judgment is poised to set a precedent for similar cases where occupants’ rights to rehabilitation or compensation are in contention, especially in the context of urban development and town planning schemes.

Date of Decision: 06 November 2023.

JAFFAR ALI NAWAB ALI  CHAUDHARI AND OTHERS VS THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFGREATER MUMBAI       

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/06-Nov-2023-Jaffar-Ali-Vs-MC-Greater-Mumbai.pdf"]

Latest Legal News