VIKAS PREMISES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED v. BRIHANMUMBAI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
Discusses principles of public safety, suppression of facts, and duties of municipal authorities regarding dangerous buildings.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHCOS:9875-DB
Decision Date: 02-07-2025
List of Laws
Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888; General Principles of Law; Writ of Mandamus; High Court on its own motion (In the matter of Jilani Building at Bhiwandi)
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: The judgment discusses Section 353B of the MMC Act, noting that the legislature made a provision that any building more than 30 years old must be certified safe by a structural engineer as provided by this section. The petitioner argued that notices were issued in breach of Section 353B. The Assistant Engineer issued a notice under Section 353B, calling on the petitioner to examine the building by appointing a structural engineer to certify its fitness for habitation within 30 days. The petitioner argued that despite granting 30 days, the respondents issued further notices in breach of Section 353B. The judgment also mentions Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, under which the Municipal Corporation required the petitioner to immediately vacate and pull down the building and to secure the structure and set up a board or fence. Section 489 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act is also mentioned, stating that the office shall take measures to comply with the requisitions and render the petitioner liable for prosecution as per relevant provisions of the Act.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment emphasizes the paramount importance of public safety and the safety of human lives over procedural delays or disputes regarding repair versus redevelopment. It highlights the duty of municipal authorities to take prompt action, including demolition, when a building is in an imminently dangerous condition. The court also discusses the concept of material suppression, noting that the petitioner failed to disclose a structural stability report indicating the building was very old, dilapidated, and required immediate vacation. The judgment also touches upon the principle that a party approaching the court must do so with clean hands.
- Writ of Mandamus: The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to declare certain notices illegal and to restrain the respondents from acting upon them. They also sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to restore electricity and water connections.
- High Court on its own motion (In the matter of Jilani Building at Bhiwandi): The judgment refers to a previous decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of "High Court on its own motion (In the matter of Jilani Building at Bhiwandi)", emphasizing that when a building is found to be in an imminently dangerous condition, posing a risk to life and property, the municipal authorities are duty-bound to take prompt action, including demolition, to avert a disaster. The court reiterated that public safety is the paramount consideration.
🔒 For Members Only