Whether building plan deemed to have been sanctioned must also satisfy the conditions laid down in the building bye-laws?

 The statute provides as to how and in what manner an application for grant of sanction of building plan should be dealt with. Section 275(3) of the Act, however, raises a legal fiction specifying the period of sixty days within which an application for grant of sanction of building plan should be considered by the appropriate authorities of the Corporation. The legislature, therefore, considered the said period of sixty days to be reasonable one during which the application for grant of sanction for a building plan should be attended to and appropriate order thereupon should be passed. However, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that when queries are raised or defects are pointed out in the building plan, the owner of the land must reply thereto and/or remove the defects pointed out.

19. A building plan deemed to have been sanctioned must also satisfy the conditions laid down in the building bye-laws.

Although a deeming provision has been provided in Sub-section (1) of Section 247 of the 1994 Act, the same will have restricted operation. In terms of the said provision, the period of sixty days cannot be counted from the date of the original application, when the building plans had been returned to the applicant for necessary clarification and/or compliance with the objections raised therein. If no sanction can be granted, when the building plan is not in conformity with the building bye-laws or has been made in contravention of the provisions of the Act or the laws, in our opinion, the restriction would not apply despite the deeming provision.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal Nos. 6192-6197 of 2008 

Decided On: 22.10.2008

 Rikhabsao Nathusao Jain  Vs. Corpn. of the City of Nagpur and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

S.B. Sinha and Cyriac Joseph, JJ.

Author: S.B. Sinha, J.

Citation: 2009(2) MHLJ (SC) 601,MANU/SC/8177/2008

Print Page

Decoding revenue Jargon for better appreciation of land Dispute(Real Estate)

A) Procedure for sanctioning of layout.

1) 10% open space is to be left for sanctioning of layout

2) tentative layout,

3) Approval

4) demarcated layout on spot

5) sanctioned layout.

6) revised layout if there is dispute.

This procedure is available under building byelaws

B) When city survey is done, Property card is issued.

Chalta sheet is maintained which shows which city survey is converted into which CTS No. in urban area. 

C) Gut no. is in respect of agricultural land .

Khasra patrak and pahni patrak are in respect of agricultural land 

Survey no is converted in to gut no in case of agricultural land.

Print Page

Bombay HC: The court should refuse to grant a temporary injunction to restrain demolition of construction if it is unauthorized

  It is true that in cases relating to orders for demolition of buildings, irreparable loss may occur if the structure is demolished even before trial, and an opportunity to establish by evidence that the structure was authorised and not illegal. In such cases, where prima facie case is made out, the balance of convenience automatically tilts in favour of plaintiff and a temporary injunction will be issued to preserve status quo. But where the plaintiffs do not make out a prima facie case for grant of an injunction and the documents produced clearly show that the structures are unauthorised, the court may not grant a temporary injunction merely on the ground of sympathy or hardship. To grant a temporary injunction, where the structure is clearly unauthorised and the final order passed by the Commissioner (of the Corporation) after considering the entire material directing demolition, is not shown to suffer from any infirmity, would be to encourage and perpetuate an illegality. {Para 31}

Bombay High Court

JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN

Shantilal Chhogalalji Doshi & Anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & ANr.

Print Page

Which rules will prevail in case of conflict between rules framed under MRTP Act and building bye-laws?

  In case of any conflict between the rules and regulations as framed under the provisions of the M.R.T.P. Act or the Development Regulation and Scheme Regulations in one hand and the building bye-laws framed by the provisions of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, it is quite clear that regulations made under the MRTP Act would prevail. {Para 28}

Bombay High Court

JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN

Shantilal Chhogalalji Doshi & Anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & ANr.

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 8 OF 2021

18th February 2021

Citation: 2021 NearLaw (BombayHC) Online 177

Print Page

Whether deemed sanction of the construction plan is permissible if it is in contravention of municipal law?

 In , Uma Shyam Parivar Trust v. State of Bihar, Division Bench of said High Court has observed:

63. However, there cannot be any doubt that the plan cannot be sanctioned which is against the mandatory provisions of the master plan and, in this view of the matter, there cannot be any deemed sanction of plan which would be in contravention of the provisions of the Act and/or mandatory provisions of the bye-laws. In other words, if a plan cannot be sanctioned by the authorities, in terms of Section 37(1) of the Act, no plan can be deemed to have been sanctioned even if the same was in violation of the mandatory provisions of the Act and the building bye-laws framed therein. Further, in any event, in case of misrepresentation or fraud as envisaged under Section 38 of the said Act, such a deemed plan may also be cancelled. The Vice Chairman of the respondent No. 2 authority in appropriate cases will also have the power to take recourse to the provisions contained in Section 40 of the said Act.

8. It is obvious that if construction itself cannot be sanctioned under Development Control Rules or Building Bye-laws, the concept of deemed sanction is not applicable to such construction. Provision for deemed sanction is made in these rules or bye-laws to induce sanctioning authority to act promptly. However, said promptness is introduced considering the fact that consequent work to be undertaken after sanction is to be completed within stipulated time by its owner. Owners also wish to avoid rising costs of construction. The concept of deemed sanction is therefore not available to presume that sanctioning authority has done something or permitted something which it itself could never have done or permitted. Thus construction which could never have been sanctioned is never deemed to have been sanctioned under this concept. Said concept is attracted when plan is perfectly in accordance with law and still the sanctioning authority does not consider it within 60 days. Some relief in equity can be considered if unauthorised construction made by invoking this principle is only irregular and compoundable under law. 

Bombay High Court

Ghanshyam S/O Chandumal Harwani ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 8 June, 2007

Print Page

Laws relating to Municipal Corporation

1) The Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949

 http://www.bareactslive.com/MAH/MH170.HTM#433A

2) The Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966

http://www.bareactslive.com/MAH/MH224.HTM#0

3) Development Control  and Promotion Regulations for D Class Municipal Corporations in Maharashtra

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UrvLks1_ys1T4QaSGWIK-3rqg3rurMNq/view?usp=sharing

Print Page