Make up your mind on action against Kapil Sharma, HC tells BMC
A bench, led by justice Naresh Patil, was hearing a plea filed by the developer, DLH Private Ltd, Sharma, actor Irrfan Khan and two other residents of the building through advocates Pradeep Thorat and VS Yadav...cities Updated: Mar 21, 2017 17:58 IST
The Bombay high court (HC) on Wednesday directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to “make up its mind” on whether it wanted to prosecute actor Kapil Sharma in the HC for violation of construction norms in his building in Goregaon, or if it wanted to continue with the civil suit in the lower court.
A bench, led by justice Naresh Patil, was hearing a plea filed by the developer, DLH Private Ltd, Sharma, actor Irrfan Khan and two other residents of the building through advocates Pradeep Thorat and VS Yadav.
According to the petition, the BMC has granted an occupation certificate to the 18-storey structure, which was built in 2010. In December 2014, the BMC issued a notice to the developer, under section 351 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, stating he had flouted construction norms and will have to face demolition. The developer challenged the notice and got an interim stay. However, in April last year, the BMC issued another demolition notice to DLH, and 15 occupants of the building.
In their petition, Sharma, Khan and the others have questioned how the BMC could send a notice on the same issue, warning of same action, when a civil suit on it was pending.
The civic body argued the “civil court had only stayed the demolition notice against the developer and, thus, it was well within its rights to have issued separate, individual notices” to occupants who flouted norms.
On Wednesday, the bench said as issues in the BMC’s notice and the civil suit were similar and involved the same occupants, the court must tag them together and the corporation must decide on proceeding with either of those cases.
Earlier this year, the BMC had filed an affidavit in the HC stating Sharma and others had made unauthorised alterations in their flats beyond approved plans, and had urged the court to dismiss their petition challenging the notice.
The HC is likely to take up the matter for further hearing on March 22.