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

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…

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 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 …

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…

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 …

The case concerned a slum rehabilitation project in Lower Parel, Mumbai, where a developer and a minority group of hutment dwellers (Sayunkta Sangharsh Samiti) entered into a private Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) to allocate flats in towers D, E and F exclusively to the society members, bypassing the Slum Rehabilit…

The case concerned the rehabilitation of about 800 slum dwellers in Mumbai who owned the land through a cooperative society. Susme Builders (the appellant) and J.G. Developers (respondent No.4) each claimed to have the consent of at least 70% of the eligible slum dwellers required under the Development Control Regulati…

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 …

Sitabai Balu Dhotre claimed ownership of a small room in Pune and sued Laxmi Ram Pawar for possession, alleging Pawar was a trespasser. Pawar argued the room lay in a slum area declared under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 and that any eviction suit required prior writte…

The appellants, residents of slums on privately owned plots in Kurla, challenged the approval of a slum rehabilitation scheme that treated their private plots together with adjoining municipal plots as a single slum area. They argued that the authorities wrongly clubbed the lands, that consent of the required 70% of el…