The High Court of Gujarat dismissed a writ petition seeking eviction of minority flat owners to enable redevelopment. The Court held that disputed questions of title and civil disputes barred it from entering the civil arena under Article 226.
Writ of mandamus seeking eviction was dismissed; notice discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7197 of 2021 with
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR JOINING PARTY) NO. 1 of 2021 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7197 of 2021
================================================================
DIPAKBHAI SOHANLAL SHARMA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR M B GANDHI, SENIOR COUNSEL with MR CHINMAY M GANDHI(3979) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MS RUMI M GANDHI(3472) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MR SATYAM Y CHHAYA(3242) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR NISARG S SHAH(8886) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4 MR MEET THAKKAR, AGP (4) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV Date : 29/11/2021
ORAL ORDER
assisted by Mr. C.M. Gandhi & Ms. Rumi M. Gandhi,
learned advocates for the petitioners, Mr. Meet M. Thakkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 - State, Mr. Satyam Y. Chhaya, learned advocate for respondent No.2 and Mr. Nisarg S. Shah, learned advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
Page 1 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
4 to vacate their property i.e. flat Nos.1 and 3 of Ronak Apartments situated at Maninagar Cross Road, Maninagar, Ahmedabad forthwith as per the contract with Shreeji Developers and cooperate with the redevelopment.
Page 2 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
conditions namely; (a) the building should have completed 25 years and (b) consent of not less than 75% of the members being satisfied in the facts of the present case. In support thereof, Resolutions have been placed on record which indicate that the respondent Nos.3 and 4 have not signed Resolutions supporting reconstruction. An agreement has already been entered into for redevelopment which is on record at page No.35. The BU permission of the building is of 25th March, 1986 which undisputedly additionally supports the case of the Society to undergo redevelopment.
Page 3 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
Page 4 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
25 years old or more, photographs and the certificate of Shri A.Y. Chippa are produced on record regarding the Stability and Safety of Existing Structure contending that the structure need not be demolished.
Page 5 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
Page 6 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
Corporation would submit that merely because the provisions under Section 41A exists, a mandate of the nature to carry out redevelopment need not be entertained.
Page 7 of 8
C/SCA/7197/2021 ORDER DATED: 29/11/2021
exercise of the powers vested under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
10. As far as the decision of Nihir Cooperative Housing
Society Limited (Supra) relied upon by Mr. M.B. Gandhi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, the only dispute that appears to be before the learned Single Judge of the Coordinate Bench of this Court was that one of the members wanted the amount that was spent for renovation to be paid by respondent No.5, which was the sole objection pursuant to which the redevelopment objective was not being carried. Therefore, there was no question of inquiry into question of ownership, this judgment would not be applicable in the present case.
[ BIREN VAISHNAV, J.]
******* VK
Page 8 of 8
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct eviction and redevelopment when disputed questions of ownership and co-owner consent exist.
Whether the doctrine of locus standi can determine civil disputes regarding title and availability of consent to redevelopment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nihir Cooperative Housing Society Limited v. State of GujaratDistinguished¶54
Special Civil Application No.16557 of 2020
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dipakbhai Sohanlal Sharma
State of Gujarat
Biren Vaishnav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
