Bombay HC sets aside acquisition of suburban Mumbai plot by SRA

The Bombay High Court has overturned a 2016 acquisition order by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) of a property in Mumbai’s Goregaon, ruling that the landowner had been deprived of exercising his preferential rights to develop the property. The Court found that the steps taken by the developer and slum dwellers amounted to fraud in acquiring the property, by fraudulently obtaining a consent decree from the city civil court.

In November 2016, the state’s slum rehabilitation office issued a notification for the acquisition of almost two acres of land belonging to Bharat Patel in Dindoshi. The HC Judgement, pronounced on April 13, noted that in 2006, the slum dwellers and Atlantic Construction Company executed a development agreement.

In January 2007, the developer moved the city civil court against the slum society, claiming that the society members threatened to dispossess him and find another developer. Two months later in March 2007, the Slum society applied to the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) for acquiring the lands. In 2012, the society consented that the developer would have all rights to develop the lands.

In 2013, Patel submitted a written application before the SRA and objected to the acquisition proceedings on various grounds. In 2015, the land was declared a slum rehabilitation area. However, a perusal of NOCs obtained by the developer indicated that the developer had already entered into a joint venture agreement with another builder prior to the 2016 notification date.

The HC noted that it was a pre-planned strategy of the developer to enter into a JV agreement with another developer, to file a collusive suit in the City Civil Court against the society, which would not oppose the said suit and would file consent terms granting all the rights in favour of the developer which they could not have granted and thereafter, applied for acquisition of the property. The Court held that it was unfortunate that the SRA overlooked these facts.

The HC said that since the SRA order is based on a fraudulent consent decree depriving the owner of his valuable rights in the property, the SRA CEO’s order deserved to be set aside. The Court also noted that Patel had never refused to redevelop the writ property and had made an offer to redevelop the property, and the offer was on record before SRA. The HC rejected a plea made by Cherag Balsara counsel for slum society for a stay of its order.

The Court's ruling highlights the need for greater transparency in land acquisition procedures and the importance of ensuring that the rights of landowners are protected. It also underscores the risks associated with collusive lawsuits and the need for regulators to remain vigilant against such practices. The ruling is likely to have broader implications for land acquisition procedures and is likely to be welcomed by landowners and developers alike.

Next (ED searches premises at Ranchi, Jamshedpur in land scams)

Bombay HC sets aside acquisition of suburban Mumbai plot by SRA

This Month

Overview

Explore

Join Us