A Division Bench comprising Justices A.S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata dismissed the writ petition filed by Jhalak Constructions and its partners Naresh Harumal Wadhwani and Sagar Mukesh Wadhwani. The court ruled that the builders obtained development permission by misleading the municipal authorities and submitting incorrect documents regarding the plot’s alignment with proposed Development Plan (DP) roads.

The subject property (Barrack No. 2112, CTS Nos. 27918 to 27922 etc., Ulhasnagar-5) measuring approximately 1004.5 sq.m. was found to be substantially affected by the 24-metre and 36-metre wide DP roads. The court noted that despite this, the builders managed to secure initial permission for 7 floors in December 2020 and revised permission for 16 floors in November 2021. They had already constructed up to 14 floors and registered the project “Jhalak Paradise” with MahaRERA.

The bench observed that the builders, with the help of their architect, had “played fraud” on the Corporation. They had even executed two Release Deeds surrendering 386.68 sq.m. of land, while simultaneously claiming in some documents that the plot was unaffected by the DP roads — an act the court described as “approbating and reprobating.”

Rejecting the builders’ plea that substantial construction had been completed and heavy investment made, the court cited recent Supreme Court judgments, including Rajendra Kumar Barjatya (2024) and Kaniz Ahmed (2025), and held that investment, partial completion, or delay by authorities cannot be grounds to regularise illegal constructions.

“Fraud vitiates all orders. A party attempting to play a fraud on the authorities cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong,” the court observed.

The High Court refused to grant any stay on the demolition, rejecting the builders’ request for even a four-week stay to approach the Supreme Court. The matter has been posted for compliance on 17th June 2026.

UMC had earlier removed the then Town Planner from his post after an inquiry revealed serious lapses in granting the permission.

Also Read: Maharashtra Govt Forms Probe Panel Over Illegal Mangrove Constructions in Thane’s Majiwade Area

The post Bombay HC Orders Demolition of 14-Storey Illegal Building appeared first on Square Feat India.

The judgment came in a long-running dispute involving Milan Cooperative Housing Society, Pune, and the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC), over land surrendered in the late 1960s for a development plan reservation.

What the Dispute Was About

Milan Cooperative Housing Society had purchased a large parcel of land in Pune in 1967 and subsequently divided it into residential plots for its members. As part of the layout approval process, the land included:

• Mandatory open space reservations, and
• A reservation for a shopping centre under the city’s development plan.

Under municipal regulations prevailing at the time, the society was required to keep 10% of the land as open space, which would have significantly reduced its construction potential.

The Deal Struck with the Municipal Corporation

To overcome this limitation, the society entered into an arrangement with the Pune Municipal Corporation:

• The society surrendered land measuring 12,741 sq ft, equivalent to the area reserved for the shopping centre.
• The land was surrendered free of cost.
• In return, PMC waived the requirement to retain 10% of the land as open space.
• This waiver allowed the society to construct more buildings and accommodate all its members.
• A possession receipt dated 9 October 1970 recorded the handover of the land.

The layout plan was approved, and construction permissions were granted based on this understanding.

Why the Society Went to Court Decades Later

Nearly 28 years later, in 1998, the society filed a civil suit claiming:

• The land was never legally acquired by PMC.
• No proper acquisition process under the MRTP Act or municipal laws was followed.
• The possession receipt was obtained under coercion.
• Actual physical possession of the land was never handed over.
• Therefore, the society continued to be the owner and had the right to develop the land as a commercial building.

The society sought:

• A declaration of ownership, and
• An injunction restraining PMC from interfering with its alleged rights.

What the Lower Courts Held

Both the trial court and the first appellate court rejected the society’s claims, holding that:

• The society had voluntarily surrendered the land.
• It had enjoyed the benefits of relaxed planning norms.
• The challenge was raised after an unexplained delay of nearly three decades.

The society then approached the Bombay High Court in a Second Appeal.

High Court’s Key Findings

Justice Gauri Godse, dismissing the appeal, made several important observations:

1. FSI and Development Rights Are Valuable Consideration

The court held that land need not always be acquired by cash compensation.

Grant of additional FSI and development permissions has clear monetary value and constitutes valid consideration under law.

The surrender of land in exchange for higher construction potential was a valid acquisition under Section 126 of the MRTP Act.

2. This Was a Concluded and Binding Agreement

The court found that:

• The society willingly surrendered the land.
• PMC waived the open space requirement in return.
• Construction was allowed and completed.
• The society benefited from the arrangement for decades.

This amounted to a concluded contract, not a one-sided or forced transaction.

3. You Cannot Challenge the Deal After Enjoying Its Benefits

The court was categorical that a party cannot:

• Accept planning concessions,
• Use them to its advantage for decades, and
• Later challenge the legality of the same arrangement when land values rise.

The judgment makes it clear:

Planning benefits cannot be enjoyed first and questioned later.

4. Delay and Conduct Defeated the Society’s Claim

The court noted that:

• The society waited 28 years to approach the court.
• It never challenged the condition when the layout was sanctioned.
• Declaratory and injunctive reliefs are discretionary, not automatic.

Given the society’s conduct, the court refused to exercise discretion in its favour.

Final Verdict

The Bombay High Court:

• Dismissed Second Appeal No. 1400 of 2005
• Upheld the decisions of the lower courts
• Confirmed that the title to the surrendered land vested in Pune Municipal Corporation
• Ruled that the society had no right to reclaim or develop the land

Why This Judgment Matters

This ruling serves as a strong reminder that:

• Development permissions come with binding conditions.
• FSI and planning relaxations have real economic value.
• Long-settled planning arrangements cannot be reopened due to rising land prices.
• Housing societies must act promptly if they wish to challenge planning conditions.

For urban local bodies, the judgment reinforces the legality of land acquisition through planning incentives rather than cash compensation.

Also Read: Renewal of Lease = New Lease, Attracts Stamp Duty Bombay High Court

The post You Can’t Take the Benefit and Challenge the Deal Later, Rules High Court Tells Housing Society appeared first on Square Feat India.

The complaint was filed by Karan Kumar Bapurao Animwar, Assistant Commissioner of the BMC’s East Suburbs Engineering Department. According to the complaint, the unauthorised alterations were carried out across several wings of the housing society, located in Kamgar Nagar, barely 1 km from the police station.

 Details of Violations

The accused residents allegedly carried out a range of structural changes, including:

• Illegal extension of balconies and front entrances
• Construction of mezzanine floors and additional roofs
• Conversion of open spaces into kitchens and toilets
• Elevation of compound walls and terraces beyond approved norms

All the alterations were executed without any permission or sanction from the BMC, violating development control regulations and sanctioned building plans.

 Timeline of Enforcement Action

• Between June 2020 and April 2025, the BMC conducted multiple inspections and served notices under Section 53(1) of the MRTP Act, asking the residents to remove the unauthorised constructions.
• Despite repeated warnings, no corrective action was taken by the residents.
• Following continued non-compliance, a proposal was submitted to take legal action under Section 53(7) of the MRTP Act.
• On receiving internal approvals, the FIR was formally registered.

 Legal Proceedings and Investigation

• The First Information Report (FIR No. 0261) has been lodged under Section 53(7), which provides for penal action in cases of non-removal of unauthorised development even after notice.
• The case has been handed over to PSI Arun Pushkar Kendre of Nehru Nagar Police Station for further investigation.
• All 27 accused have been named in the FIR with flat and building details clearly mentioned.

 Impact and Implications

This action marks one of the few instances where such a large group of individual flat owners have faced legal action collectively for violations within a single housing society. It reflects the BMC’s stricter stance on illegal construction and a push for greater compliance in residential colonies.

Sources within the BMC suggest that more such actions may follow as the civic body intensifies its enforcement drive against unauthorised construction in suburban Mumbai.

Also Read: BMC issues First Air Pollution Notice to a Developer

The post BMC Registers FIR Against 27 Residents for Unauthorised Construction in Flats appeared first on Square Feat India.

During the event, a complaint was raised about illegal construction on the terrace of Suruchi Cooperative Housing Society in Abhyudayanagar. The complainant highlighted that despite repeated complaints, no action had been taken under the MRTP Act. Concerns were also raised about the potential safety risks posed by the unauthorized construction. The chairperson directed the Executive Engineer to survey the building, prepare a detailed report, and submit it to the Encroachment Removal Cell of the Mumbai Board. A one-month timeline was set for action against the encroachment.

Another grievance involved a delayed allotment under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (Urban). The complainant, who had secured a flat in the Shirgaon Housing Project, Kalyan, through the Konkan Board’s 2018 lottery, had not yet received possession. Upon investigation, the delay was attributed to verification issues on the PMAY (Urban) portal, which had since been resolved. The chairperson instructed officers to ensure immediate possession of the flat.

Four applications were received during the Lokshahi Day event, with two each related to the Mumbai and Konkan Boards. MHADA has so far conducted seven Lokshahi Day sessions, addressing 75 out of 81 applications received.

Also Read: Mumbai MHADa MHADA lottery

The post MHADA Sets One-Month Deadline for Action on Illegal Construction in Abhyudayanagar appeared first on Square Feat India.

In total, CIDCO conducted 547 demolition drives over the year, targeting various types of unauthorized developments, including temporary structures, RCC buildings, and illegal stalls. Prior to the demolitions, CIDCO issued notices to 2,160 property owners, informing them of the impending action under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act.

The demolitions were carried out with the support of Navi Mumbai Police, ensuring law and order during these operations. CIDCO’s ongoing efforts to remove encroachments come as part of its broader mission to prevent disruptions to the city’s urban planning. The reclaimed land is expected to aid in the development of key infrastructure projects, including the Navi Mumbai International Airport, Atal Setu (MTHL), Ulwe Coastal Road, Navi Mumbai Metro, and various housing schemes.

CIDCO has also been actively publishing notices in newspapers to warn residents about illegal constructions and is advising potential buyers in the region to verify property documents carefully to avoid financial risks related to unauthorized buildings.

The demolition drives are seen as a necessary step in safeguarding the city’s development, ensuring that encroachments do not obstruct planned infrastructure and urban growth.

Also Read: CIDCO lottery for plots

The post CIDCO Reclaims Over 2 Lakh Sq. M. of Land from Encroachments in 2024 appeared first on Square Feat India.