Registered agreements no shield for unauthorised constructions: HC

Bombay HC rules registered agreements between developers and intervenors cannot validate unauthorized constructions in Vasai-Virar; intervenors free to sue developers for damages.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court has ruled that registered agreements between developers and intervenors, who purchase units from the former, cannot protect or validate unauthorised constructions. The court, while hearing a petition seeking action against illegal construction on land reserved for civic amenities in Vasai-Virar, held that intervenors who purchase units believing they are legal are free to sue developers and seek damages.

HT Image

A bench of justices MS Sonak and Kamal Khata was hearing a writ petition filed by Mohan Sukhlal Patel and others who alleged that buildings were erected illegally on a land parcel in Vasai-Virar reserved for a sewage treatment plant and dumping ground. The petitioners claimed that the Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation’s (VVCMC) efforts to demolish the illegal structures, intiated in July 2021, were thwarted by legal challenges, including stays obtained by some of the affected parties.

The counsel for VVCMC said the corporation was committed to taking down the unauthorised constructions. Some of the illegal buildings had already been demolished and the demolition process would continue, the counsel assured the bench.

The intervenors’ counsel said they had purchased units from the developer under the impression that the constructions were legal and authorised. They contended that since their agreements with the developer were registered, they should be honoured. The court, however, dismissed this argument, stating the agreements could not validate unauthorised structures.

The court directed VVCMC to proceed with demolitions but granted the intervenors time till September 30 to vacate the premises, provided they submit undertakings within a month. VVCMC must file a compliance report by October 30, detailing the demolition of all illegal constructions on the site, the court said. It also restrained the intervenors from transferring or creating any third-party rights until they vacate the premises.

The court, however, refused to entertain the petitioners’ demand for disciplinary action against officials, as it acknowledged that the constructions were undertaken when the property was under the control of the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra (CIDCO). The VVCMC also faced legal hurdles in demolishing the unauthorised constructions, the court observed.