Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Moren (Manager)     01 December 2012

Re-erection of structure meaning interpretation

Hi,

Need some legal advice on the following case related to Property.

A legal structure was demolished by Municipality without following proper process of law and fudging records. The owner of the structure approached the High court who ordered for its re-erection and gave liberty to the Municipality to take action if the structure is illegal after going through the permissions and following due process of law. High court even ordered Municipality to pay construction costs.

In respeonse, the owner started re-erection but mid-way, Municipality issued Stop work notice. When the owner pointed out that this is Contempt of court order, the notice was taken bak but a 351 was issued although the re-erection is incomplete.

Aggrevied, the owner approached the High court and filed a Contempt petition. During hearing, Minucipality lawyer admitted that the structure is not complete but nearing cpmpletion. The Judge issed a Show cause notice to Municipality as to why action should not be taken for contempt of courts as Stop work notice was issued amd then 351 and even verbally asked Municipality to withdraw the same.

When the next hearing was held, the Judge got changed and the new judge is of the view that re-erection does not mean completion of structure work as it was. The interpretation of the word "re-erection" is the point of argument. The new Judge asked the matter to be resolved mutually and withdraw the petition.

The issue is when the Courts themselves have ordered for re-erection after going through the permissions, can the Contempt petition be dismissed on the grounds that re-erection does not mean "complete" reconstruction.

Can anybody help and provide related Judgements. What should be the next course of action by the owner in light that Municipality is biased against him due to undue political pressure and now the Judge mistaking the legal structure as illegal as alleged by Municipality.

eThe matter is urgent as the next date is nearing and the argument is being done by the PEtitioner in person who has little knowledge of Property/ land laws.



Learning

 0 Replies


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register