Bombay High Court
Manilal M. Parmar vs Mumbai Building Repair And ... on 3 March, 2020
Bench: S.J. Kathawalla, R.I.Chagla
920 wp 2860 of 2019.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2860 OF 2019
Bharat Bhikhabhai Parmar ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.1331 OF 2019
Shivshankar Parasnath Mishra ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2859 OF 2019
Sudhir Narayan Mandavkar ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2861 OF 2019
Ramesh Devji Phadakale ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2871 OF 2019
Pramod Govind Padgaonkar ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2912 OF 2019
SSP 1/5
::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 07/06/2020 08:33:08 :::
920 wp 2860 of 2019.doc
Gopal Kalishankar Mishra ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2932 OF 2019
Manilal M. Parmar ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.3020 OF 2019
Chandrakant Shivram Ghevade ... Petitioner
versus
Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction
Board and Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Arshil Shah with Mrs. Smita Diptesh, for Petitioners.
Mrs. Aparna Kalathil with Mrs. Priyanka Naik i/by Mr. P.G.Lad, for Respondent
Nos.1 and 2.
Mrs. Rupali Adhate, for MCGM.
Mr. Ashok Maru, for Respondent No.6.
Mr. Ashok Bhatia, for Respondent No.7.
Mr. Jignesh Joshi, Mr. Ramesh Joshi, Landlord, present.
CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA &
R.I.CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE: 3rd MARCH, 2020 P.C.:
1. By the above Writ Petitions, the Petitioners seek the following reliefs :
"(a) This Hon'ble Court be please to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus ordering and directing Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to exercise powers SSP 2/5 ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 07/06/2020 08:33:08 ::: 920 wp 2860 of 2019.doc conferred unto it under the provisions of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, interalia initiate urgent repairs to the building known as Motibhai Devidas Building, lying being and situated on property bearing cess No.D-721, D-849-50, Building No.2, Borbhat Lane & 30-36, Cow Lane Girgaon, Mumbai - 400 004 by utilizing the repair fund available and restore it absolutely to a safe and habitable state;
(b) This Hon'ble Court may also be please to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ Order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus ordering and directing Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to exercise powers conferred unto it under the provisions of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 interalia acquire the building from the Respondent No.6, who is disinterested in repairing and/or maintaining and/or developing the said Building and carry urgent repairs to the building known as Motibhai Devidas Building, lying, being and situated on property bearing C.S.No.214 and 215 of Girgaon Division bearing cess No.D-721, D-849-50, Building No.2, Borbhat Lane and 30-36, Cow Lane, Girgaon, Mumbai - 400 004 and restore it absolutely to a safe and habitable state;"
2. We were informed that the redevelopment agreement was executed by and between the landlord and the Developers in the year 2010, however, no action is taken by the landlord and/or the developer till date. Since according to the Petitioners, the landlord and the developers were not accepting service and were also not attending the SSP 3/5 ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 07/06/2020 08:33:08 ::: 920 wp 2860 of 2019.doc Court, this Court directed them to remain present in Court. Accordingly, they are present before us. The landlord as well as the developer agree before us, that an agreement to redevelop the subject property was executed in the year 2010; that NOC was issued by MHADA for redevelopment in the year 2013; the Corporation also issued IOD in the year 2013; the redevelopment work was to be completed within 30 months from the date of the NOC issued by the MHADA; that since the property was not conveyed in favour of the landlord and the same was conveyed only in the year 2014; fresh IOD was issued in the year 2015 by the Corporation.
3. When this Court inquired from the developer as well as the landlord as to what steps they have taken since the year 2015, the Court is informed that by a letter dated 7th April, 2018 the tenants were informed that the earlier IOD had also lapsed and the process of registration of the alternate agreement can start after a fresh IOD is received. The tenants were also conveyed that RERA registration will be made soon after the meeting held with the tenants and the corpus funds will be given to individual flat owners since the landlord had financial backing of a joint venture partner i.e. Shraddha Highrise LLP. However, fresh IOD is not obtained till date; RERA registration is also not made; the corpus fund is also not paid to the individual tenants; and the joint venture partner has backed out.
4. In view thereof, the condition of the building has deteriorated since the same is not maintained. We are therefore, convinced that the landlord as well as the SSP 4/5 ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 07/06/2020 08:33:08 ::: 920 wp 2860 of 2019.doc developer are not interested in repairing and/or redeveloping the subject building. Infact, in response to a query put by the Court to the developer, whether he has carried out any construction till date qua any project, his answer is in the negative. When this Court enquired from the landlord who is present in Court along with his father, whether the landlord is willing to repair the building or he wants the tenants to repair the same, his immediate response is that the tenants may repair the building.
5. In light of the above, the tenants are allowed to repair the building after taking all the necessary permissions from the statutory authorities.
6. Stand over to 31st March, 2020. In the meantime, the developer and/or landlord shall not act on the NOC issued by the MHADA /Corporation.
( R.I.CHAGLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.) SSP 5/5 ::: Uploaded on - 16/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 07/06/2020 08:33:08 :::