Skip to main content

Civic body can't disconnect water, power to building before evacuation: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that a civic body has no right to disconnect water and electric supply to a dilapidated building before the process of evacuation begins.

"Such action can only be taken at the time of evacuation and not in advance," Justice Anoop Mohata said on December 21 while hearing a petition filed by Manjul Darshan Building Tenants Welfare Association in suburban Borivali.

The petitioner had challenged the action of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to disconnect water and electricity to the building in order to evacuate the occupants as it was in a dilapidated condition.

The occupants/tenants unless evicted in accordance with law, are entitled to basic amenities such as water and electricity uninterruptedly. This in no way obstructs and/or can be stated to be a hurdle in way of the corporation's power and/or local authorities' power to take action of evacuation after due notice, said the judge.

"The advance disconnection in such fashion, in my view, is totally unjust, unacceptable and shows inhuman approach of the local bodies, one who instead of providing the amenities to the citizens, merely because eviction notices are issued and they have a power to take such necessary steps, by this method are compelling the occupants to vacate the premises", the judge observed.

This is nothing but taking away the rights of the citizen/occupants to use the necessary amenities like water and electricity, which is otherwise available and provided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the judge said.

"Water and electricity are essential part of life. Such disconnection to hasten up the evacuation process in my view, is impermissible," the judge ruled.

The court directed the municipal corporation to connect the water supply forthwith. BMC was also restrained from disconnecting electricity without due and proper notice.

However, the court made it clear that the continuation of the stay of the occupants/tenants in such dilapidated building, inspite of the notices by the corporation, will be at their risk and the consequences. The corporation officers will not be responsible, in case of any mishap.

Article referred: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-12-25/news/45561626_1_brihanmumbai-municipal-corporation-evacuation-occupants

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Vanishing promoters and languishing shareholders

Over Rs 60,000 crore of shareholders’ wealth is stuck in 1,450 companies suspended by the stock exchanges. More importantly, near 100 per cent pledging of promoter holding appears to be common in many of these companies. This, almost rules out any chance of the companies bouncing back. The suspension is for non-compliance of the listing norms. Vanishing Companies - Definition As per the definition stipulated by SEBI, any listed company, which raised moneythrough initial public offer and, thereafter, stopped operations, did not file returnseither with the RoC or SEBI and did not exist on the registered premises wastermed as vanishing.There are provisions under Companies Act under which companies are termedvanishing companies on satisfying certain conditions. it is provided a companywould be deemed to be a vanishing company, if it satisfies all the conditions given below : a) Failed to file returns with Registrar of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) Failed to fil