Bombay High Court on Unauthorized Structures: Appeals Dismissed.

Headnote:

The Bombay High Court dismissed all appeals filed by the appellants seeking injunctions against demolition of small structures built on land belonging to Nemi Krishna Cooperative Housing Society near Kandivali Railway Station. The Court found that the appellants had no ownership or title over the structures and had suppressed previous litigation history related to similar structures. The Court held that unauthorized structures cannot be regularized merely on the basis of possession documents, electricity bills, or repair permissions issued decades ago. Non-disclosure of prior litigation and reliance on insufficient evidence was treated as clear suppression of facts, justifying dismissal of all appeals.

Background:

1. The appellants were owners of 8 small structures of varying dimensions (5x5 ft to 35x18 ft) on land owned by Nemi Krishna Cooperative Housing Society.
2. Structures were challenged by MCGM as unauthorized.
3. Appellants relied on:
4. Census Certificate (1980)
5. Census Receipt (2000)
6. Repair Permission from MCGM (1982)
7. Electricity Bills and photographs to claim ownership.
8. Previous litigation (1998–2024) involved 27 similar structures; interim injunctions were granted but ultimately dismissed. Regularization applications were rejected and Supreme Court dismissed related SLPs in 2024.
9. Appellants attempted to circumvent law by filing new suits without disclosing prior litigation, claiming structures were newly acquired or separate from earlier cases.

Court’s Observations:

1. The appellants’ claims were found false and misleading, suppressing prior litigation.
2. Unauthorized structures cannot be regularized on historical possession or old permissions alone.
3. Past interim injunctions do not confer legitimacy.
4. Legal precedents cited by appellants were inapplicable.
5. MCGM has authority to demolish unauthorized structures, and rightful ownership lies with Nemi Krishna Cooperative Housing Society.

Legal Provisions Discussed:

1. Section 349, MMC Act, 1888 – Power to remove unauthorized structures.
2. Principles of equity and good faith in property claims – Suppression of prior litigation invalidates claims.
3. Civil appellate jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226, Constitution of India – Powers to review municipal action and protect lawful property rights.

Conclusion:

All appeals were dismissed. The Court emphasized that attempts to use procedural technicalities to protect illegal structures cannot succeed. Appellants were declared illegal occupants and the MCGM’s authority to demolish unauthorized structures was upheld.

Citation: 2025:BOMHC:226

Case: Ganpat Shankar Chougule & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay

Coram: Justice Milind N. Jadhav

Date of Decision: 26 November 2025

Appeal Nos.: 226, 227, 247 & 248 of 2025