The Bombay High Court has criticized the BMC for inaction and permitted a tenants association to seek permission for the reconstruction of a demolished building. Chandralok building on Aarey Road, Pahadi village, was constructed in 1965. It was dubbed a C-1 category dangerous building by the BMC in 2014. In July 2019, the 103 tenants vacated the building and it was demolished. The owner - who is also lessee of the land - failed to take steps for reconstruction or redevelopment or provide alternative accommodation. The HC noted the obligation of the BMC to act when there is no owner-led proposal and upheld tenants' statutory right to reconstruction.
The Bombay High Court has reprimanded the BMC (Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation) for its prolonged inaction and granted permission to a tenants' association to apply for the reconstruction of a ground-plus-four-story building in Goregaon that was demolished four years ago. The Chandralok People Welfare Association, representing 103 tenants, filed a petition requesting the BMC to compel the building's owners to redevelop or reconstruct it. Alternatively, they sought permission for tenants to engage a developer for the reconstruction.
Chandralok building on Aarey Road, Pahadi village, was constructed in 1965. It was categorized as a C-1 category dangerous building by the BMC in 2014. In July 2019, the 103 tenants vacated the building and it was demolished.
Advocates Abhishek Sawant and Ameet Mehta, representing the association, argued that the owners had not taken any tangible steps towards reconstruction or redevelopment in over four years since the evacuation of all 103 tenants. The HC noted that the owners had failed to demonstrate any proposals for either reconstruction or redevelopment and ruled in favour of the tenants, citing Section 499(3) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) Act. This section grants tenants the right to form an association and apply for and obtain permission for reconstruction if the owners neglect to do so.
In their ruling, Justices Gautam Patel and Kamal Khata criticized the BMC's prolonged inaction when a building has been demolished, tenants have been displaced, and there is no reconstruction or redevelopment proposal submitted by the property owner. They stressed the BMC's obligation to act under the MMC Act whereby they could direct the property owner to commence reconstruction or redevelopment within a specific timeframe.
The judges rejected the owners' claims that they were not obligated to reconstruct or redevelop the building and that the BMC lacked the authority to permit tenants to initiate reconstruction. However, the HC agreed with the owners that tenants had the right to rebuild only to the extent of the demolished area and not redevelop the entire building. It also clarified that there is no requirement for consent or NOC from the owners for such reconstruction permission.
Based on this, the court clarified that the tenants have a statutory right to reconstruction and the BMC is obliged to permit it without prior consent from the owners. The BMC has now been instructed to consider and process the tenants' application for reconstruction within six weeks from the date of submission.
The court's ruling underlines the importance of taking swift action when it comes to dilapidated buildings and the responsibilities of relevant authorities. It also empowers tenants to pursue reconstruction in the absence of owner-led efforts. This decision has potential implications for similar cases and encourages responsible action by property owners and municipal authorities in addressing dilapidated structures.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
