Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976

Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar, the wife of respondent No.8, sought a writ directing the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) to re‑house her in two flats (Nos. 601 & 602) of the redeveloped building, which she claimed as her matrimonial home. The High Court dismissed the writ, holding that the matter wa…

The appellants, who were transit camp tenants, challenged notices issued by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) under Sections 33 and 38 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, seeking to evict them from a plot they claimed was a MHADA layout and therefore could only be r…

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 14(1)(d) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 bars the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) from taking possession of land that was licensed to a corporate debtor under a Tripartite Joint Development Agreement during the moratorium period. The corp…

The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) constructed 165 flats but received negligible public response to its advertisements. Consequently, MHADA adopted a "Bulk Purchase Scheme" and issued a Letter of Intent on 25 October 2004 to the sole applicant, Powai Plant Co‑operative Housing Society (the a…

The State of Maharashtra, through MHADA, filed contempt and perjury applications against P.K. Pangare alleging that he misled the Supreme Court by denying construction on land covered by a prohibitory order. Pangare had sold the land before the order, and construction was subsequently carried out by later owners, notab…

The appellant, Sam Hiring Co., a tenant occupying a shed in City Survey No. 56, challenged the acquisition of its premises under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, arguing that the structure was an independent, non‑cess‑payable building and therefore exempt from demolition. It also contended that t…

S. Rajani, the appellant, owned a residential tenement and alleged that S. Smita, the first respondent, had constructed illegal rooms on an open vacant site in the same building, infringing Rajani's easements of light, air, privacy and water supply. Rajani filed a regular civil suit seeking removal of the unauthorized …

The appellants, tenants under the Indian Mercantile Association, filed a writ petition under Section 103-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, seeking relief that the High Court dismissed on the ground that an alternative statutory remedy—an appeal—was available. The appellants contended that rel…

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the amendment of Regulation 33(7) of the Development Control Regulations, 1991 (Greater Mumbai), alleging that it was being misused to demolish privately owned, sound pre‑1940 buildings and that the regulation imposed unreasonable side‑space restrictions. The Bombay Hig…

The petitioners sought an interim order declaring that the acquisition of a "cessed" building by MHADA under Chapter VIII‑A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 was no longer necessary, as the landlord and tenants had entered into a development agreement while the substantive constitutional challen…

The petition challenged the constitutional validity of Chapter VIII‑A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, which allows acquisition of properties on payment of one hundred times the monthly rent, and argued that Article 31C of the Constitution shields the Act from attack under Articles 14 and 19. …