Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.37 seconds)
Documents citing Namdev Pandurang Panchal vs Mumbai Municipal Corporation Of ... on 16 September, 2005

M/S Percept Advertising Limited Thr. ... vs Municipal Corporation For Greater ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:14 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Renaissance Paints Private ... vs Designated Officer Asst. Engineer ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:08 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Sverlasting Proprties Llp Thr. Its ... vs Municipal Corpoaration Of Greater ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:11 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Renaissance Paints Private ... vs Designated Officer Asst. Engineer ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:05 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Delux Plymer Private Limited vs Designated Officer Asst. Engineer ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:00:59 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Smt. Durgavti Ramkripal Jaiswawr And ... vs Designated Officer Asst. ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:18 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Babulal Bhra Of Mumbai vs Designated Officer Asst. Engineer ... on 24 September, 2018

68. Lastly, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent-Municipal Corporation has also relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Namdev Pandurang Panchal Vs. Mumbai Municipal Corporation of 47/50 AO(St.)-22038-18-Group.doc ::: Uploaded on - 26/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/09/2018 01:01:02 ::: Greater Bombay, 2005(4) ALL M.R. 689 , wherein while considering the provisions of Section 351 of the MMC Act, it was held that, "When the Plaintiff had failed to prove existence of structure prior to 1977 or from 1962 and the land upon which structure stand, could neither belonged to Plaintiff, nor of BMC, therefore, BMC even had no authority to regularize the structure on somebody else's property."
Bombay High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1