Legal
One of the key and most important functions of CREDAI-MCHI is our legal department. Our members and the Real Estate community face various legal issues on a regular basis, as a body representing the industry, it is our duty to help solve them. For the benefit of the Real Estate Developers community, CREDAI-MCHI helps in challenging various issues affecting its members or the industry at large at the Bombay High Court & The Supreme Court of India. Details pertaining to issues challenged in the court of law by CREDAI-MCHI, ie Writ Petitions, Orders passed etc can be downloaded by logging on to your account.
One of the key and most important functions of CREDAI-MCHI is its legal department. Our members and the Real Estate community faces various legal issues on a regular basis, as a body representing the sector, it is our duty to help solve them. For the benefit of the Real Estate Developers community, CREDAI-MCHI helps in challenging various issues affecting its members or the real estate sector at large at the Bombay High Court & the Supreme Court of India.
Details pertaining to issues challenged in the court of law by CREDAI-MCHI are as under;
Flamingo, SGNP ESZ Case
In a significant legal triumph, CREDAI-MCHI secured a favourable verdict from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, brining clarity to the boundaries surrounding the Eco Sensitive Zones (ESZ) of the Sanjay Gandhi National Park (SGNP) and Thane Flamingo Sanctuary (TFS). The Supreme Court’s order, dated June 3, 2022, initially imposed a 1 km restriction on new developments within these zones.
Taking proactive measurers, CREDAI-MCHI filed an Intervention Application seeking clarification and confirmation of the notifications defining the ESZ boundaries. On September 23, 2022, the Supreme Court, led by Justice Gavai, issue a clarifying judgement. It stated that the 1 km restriction would not apply to SGNP and TFS, as final notifications for these ESZs had already been issued on December 5, 2016, and October 14, 2021, respectively.
Land Use Change: Collaborative Legal Endeavour
In a complex legal matter involving factors and categories of users of buildings or land and the fixation of Capital Value Rules (CVR), CREDAI-MCHI has taken a proactive stance. CMDWA, supported by CREDAI-MCHI, filed an Intervention/Implement Application in favour of the High Court’s findings, reinforcing the unconstitutionality of Rules 20, 21 and 22. The legal team, consisting of prominent Counsel Mr. Darius Khambata, Mr. Kunal Vajani and Mr. Chirag Shroff, represented CMDWA effectively.
Senior Counsel Mr. Darius Khambata argued CMDWA’s case in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which culminated in a judgment on November 7, 2022. The Supreme Court ruled that Rules 20, 21 and 22 were contrary to the law and acted as deterrents to redevelopment projects under DCR 33 (7). Consequently, these rules were struck down and MCGM was directed to re-fix the capital value.
Responding to this judgment, MCGM filed a Review Petition, which was subsequently dismissed on March 14, 2023, by Chief Justice C. J. Chandrachud bench of the Supreme Court. This legal battle exemplifies CREDAI-MCHI’s commitment to upholding the interests of its members and ensuring fairmess within the industry.
Ready Reckoner Rates Matter in Bombay High Court Writ Petition No. 8691 of 2021
In the realm of legal challenges, CREDAI-MCHI has initiated a legal battle against the Ready Reckoner Rates (RR Rates) for the period spanning September 12, 2020, to March 31, 2021 (RR Rates for 20-21) The association filed Writ Petition No. 8691 of 2021 in the Bombay High Court, contesting the land rates depicted in the Annual Statement of Rates (ASR), commonly known as RR Rates.
CREDAI-MCHI’s petition argues that these rates have been calculated in a manner that contravenes the law, alleging arbitrariness, illegality, vagueness, unreasonableness, unfairness and actions against the public interest. The legal team has diligently completed the necessary pleadings.
Furthermore, CREDAI-MCHI has also challenged the RR Rates for 23-24, citing unscientific and arbitrary calculations that defy the stipulations of the Stamp Act. The legal team, with Senior Advocate Mr. Girish Godbole, is prepared for the legal proceedings related to both petitions.
Bombay High Court Writ Petition for challenging Circular 210 of 1st August 2023 imposing additional obligation on developers of SRA schemes for deposit of 2 years advance transit rent at state of Annexure III.
CREDAI-MCHI has filed Precipe before Prothonotry and Senior Master, High Court, Bombay for formation of the bench consisting of Chief Justice.
NGT RG on Mother Earth
CREDAI-MCHI filed a Civil Appeal in the Supreme Court against the order of the NGT (Special Bench) dated September 13, 2022 – On 10 May 2024, Ex-parte stay of NGT order till the next date of hearing.
Heritage Matter in Bombay High Court W.P. No.1564 of 2013
The petition is filed at High Court, challenging the notice dt.31st July 2012, for declaring any property or precincts as heritage building under DCR 67.
CRZ Matter in Bombay High Court W.P. No.1387 of 2013
This petition is filed at High Court, and is at admission stage, the issue challenged was the Notification dt.6 January 2011 and Para 8 (V) (iii) (b) 2, to be set aside; proposals falling under paragraph 8 (V) (b) and paragraph 8 (V) (c) of CRZ Notification dated 6th January, 2011 on the basis of the original Notification dated 6th January, 2011, ignoring the Corrigendum Notification dated 29th March, 2011 by applying DC Regulations as in force on the date of approval of the project by the Competent Authority and not as on 6th January 2011;
Section 43 CA of Income Tax Act matter in Bombay High Court W.P. No 1287 of 2014
This petition is filed at Bombay High Court, it came up for hearing and the Hon’ble Court has asked the Sate/Department file an Affidavit in Rejoinder in the Court, the issue challenged was the provisions of sec.43 CA & 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) of the Income Tax Act.
Sewerage Petition matter in Bombay High Court W.P No. 1384 of 2005
This petition is filed against, “Sewerage and Waste Removal Rules”, towards sewerage charges being charged by MCGM.
Prayed for the Hon’ble Court be pleased to declare that the rules 4.1, 5, 5.1, 5.2, 5.6, 5.7, 58, 72 & 73 of the Sewerage and Waste Removal Rules framed by the Corporation are unconstitutional, illegal, null & void and are liable to be struck down by this Hon’ble Court on the ground that the same permits the levy of sewerage charges when there is no water supplied for nor measured.