Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971

6 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

YASH DEVELOPERSversusHARIHAR KRUPA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED & ORS.

2024 INSC 55930 July 2024Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the termination of a development agreement between Yash Developers (appellant) and Harihar Krupa Co‑Operative Housing Society (respondent) under Section 13 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, which had been upheld by the Bombay High Court. The C

MANSOOR ALI FARIDA IRSHAD ALI & OTHERSversusTHE TAHSILDAR-I, SPECIAL CELL & OTHERS

2025 INSC 27627 February 2025Dismissed

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

TARABAI NAGAR CO-OP. HOG. SOCIETY (PROPOSED)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 101522 August 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute over the acquisition of a 9,054‑sq‑m land in a Slum Rehabilitation (SR) Area in Mumbai, owned by Indian Cork Mills Private Limited (ICM) but claimed by the Tarabai Nagar Co‑op. Housing Society. The Court considered whether the owner has a preferential right to redevelop the SR Area

SALDANHA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusBISHOP JOHN RODRIGUES AND OTHERS

2025 INSC 101622 August 2025Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the acquisition of a 1,596.40 sq. m. parcel of land owned by the Basilica of Our Lady of the Mount (a public trust) under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. The High Court had set aside a public notice and an order approving the ac

IN RE: ZUDPI JUNGLE LANDS versus

2025 INSC 75422 May 2025Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the status of Zudpi Jungle lands in six districts of Maharashtra, which, although recorded as forest lands, have been used for residential, agricultural, and governmental purposes for decades. The State of Maharashtra sought to treat these lands as non‑forest to avoid the restrictions of the

JYOTI BUILDERSversusCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & ORS.

2025 INSC 13722 December 2025Disposed off

The dispute concerned a 2,005‑sq‑m parcel in Malad, Mumbai, originally declared a slum and reserved as Recreational Ground under the 1991 Development Plan. Jyoti Builders (appellant) claimed that the 2015 order of the CEO‑SRA required the State Government to acquire the land under s.14(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search