Disposed

Shreenath Krupa Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. v. Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Aug 2005WP/449/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of multiple writ petitions regarding property tax by noting the passage of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Second Amendment) Act, 2005, which inserted Section 144-D. The new provision mandated reduced tax rates for specific residential tenements, rendering the challenges moot.

What did the court decide?

All writ petitions were disposed of as nothing survives in light of the new statutory provision passed by the State Legislature.

Shreenath Krupa Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. Vs… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.449 OF 2005

¶4

Shreenath Krupa Co-op. Housing Society Limited Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶5

..Petitioner.

¶6

WITH

¶7

WRIT PETITION (LODG.) NO.1033 OF 2005

¶8

.. Blossom Co-op. Housing Society Limited Petitioner.

¶9

Vs.

¶10

.. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶11

WITH WRIT PETITION (LODG.) NO.1034 OF 2005

¶12

Gopal Sadan Co-op. Housing Society Limited ..Petitioner. Vs.

¶13

.. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶14

WITH WRIT PETITION (LODG.) NO.1035 OF 2005

¶15

Bliss Co-op. Housing Society Limited Vs.

¶16

..Petitioner.

¶17

.. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶18

Mr. J. Reis with Mr. Y.M. Chaudhari for the Petitioners. (in all the above matters).

¶19

¶20

Ms. Aruna Savla for Respondent No.1. (in all the above matters).

¶21

Mr. R.M. Sawant, Government Pleader for Respondent No.2 (State). (in all the above matters).

¶22

WITH WRIT PETITION (LODG.) NO.1114 OF 2005

¶23

Vishal Villa Co-op. Housing Society Limited

¶24

..Petitioner.

¶25

Vs.

¶26

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶27

WITH

¶28

WRIT PETITION (LODG.) NO.1115 OF 2005

¶29

Park Avenue Co-op. Housing Society Limited Vs.

¶30

..Petitioner.

¶31

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶32

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.1208 OF 2005

Rajendra C. Jain

..Petitioner.

Vs.

.. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶37

Mr. J. Reis with Mr. Y.M. Chaudhari for the Petitioners. (in all the above matters).

¶38

Ms. Aruna Savla for Respondent No.1. (in all the above matters).

¶39

Mr. Amjad Sayed, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.2 (State). (in all the above matters).

¶40

WITH

¶41

WRIT PETITION NO.1161 OF 2005

¶42

¶43

Goodwill Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs.

¶44

..Petitioner.

¶45

.. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr. Respondents.

¶46

Mr.Shyam Diwan, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Y.M. Chaudhari for the Petitioner.

¶47

Ms. Aruna Savla for Respondent No.1.

¶48

Mr. Amjad Sayed, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondent No.2 (State)

¶49

CORAM : DALVEER BHANDARI, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

¶50

25^th August , 2005.

¶51

P.C. :

¶52

The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State

¶53

submits that Bill No.19 of 2005 has been passed by both the Houses of the State and it has been sent for the assent of the Governor.

¶54

He further submits that Section 144-D has been inserted in

¶55

the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. The same reads as under :

¶56

“144-D. Notwithstanding anything contained in section 140 or any other provisions of this Act, during the period of twenty years from the date of commencement of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (Second Amendment) Act, 2005 or from the date of first occupation of the tenements hereinafter

¶57

¶58

specified, whichever is later, the property tax in respect of the residential tenements having carpet area not exceeding 350 square feet, situated in a building, in the Island City of Mumbai, which, -

¶59

(a) is entitled to FSI benefit under regulation 33(7) of the Development Control Regulations for Brihan Mumbai, 1994; and

¶60

(b) is a cessed building governed by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 and is reconstructed or redeveloped by,-

¶61

(i)the co-operative housing society formed by existing tenants; or

¶62

(ii)the co-operative society formed by the occupiers (including owner occupier) of the building classified as Category 'A under section 84 of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976; or

¶63

(C) belongs to the Corporation, was first constructed prior to 1940 and is reconstructed or redeveloped by the cooperative housing society formed by its occupiers;

¶64

shall be levied at such reduced rate, as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time, fix; and different rates may be fixed for different periods and for different tenements:

¶65

Provided that, no tax at reduced rate shall be levied in respect of the residential tenement, in the building reconstructed or redevelped by the co-operative housing society of the existing tenants or occupiers, if the existing tenant or occupier ceases to occupy the tenement in the reconstructed or redeveloped building as a member of such co-operative housing society.”

¶66

¶67

In view of the new provision, Section 144-D, all assessments of the Corporation will have to be in consonance with the new provision after it receives the assent of the Governor. In view of this development, nothing further survives in this batch of petitions and they are accordingly disposed of.

¶68

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶69

DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.

Shreenath Krupa Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. v. Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreenath Krupa Co-Op. Hsg. Soc. Ltd. v. Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok N. Bhawale and Anr. Vs Muncipal Commissioner Muncipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai

Viniyog Parivar Trust Vs Union of India and Ors.

Janhit Manch and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gopal Sadan Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Goodwill Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Rajendra C. Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.