PRAFULLA C. DAVE & ORS. versus MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER & ORS.
The ten-year period for lapsing of reservation under Section 127 MRTP Act is to be reckoned from the date of coming into force of the revised development plan under Section 38, not from the original plan. A notice issued before expiry of ten years from the revised plan is premature and cannot result in lapsing of reservation.
- Parties
- Appellants: Prafulla C. Dave & Ors.; Respondents: Municipal Commissioner & Ors.
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 03 December 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Reservation of Land, Lapsing of Reservation, Interpretation of Ten Year Period Under MRTP Act S.127, Revision of Development Plan Under S.38
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Prafulla C. Dave & Ors.
Appellants
Municipal Commissioner & Ors.
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the ten-year period under s.127 MRTP Act is reckoned from the date of the first development plan u/s.21 or the revised development plan u/s.38
- 2 Whether notice issued under s.127 before expiry of ten years from revised plan is premature
Ratio Decidendi
The ten-year period for lapsing of reservation under Section 127 MRTP Act is to be reckoned from the date of coming into force of the revised development plan under Section 38, not from the original plan. A notice issued before expiry of ten years from the revised plan is premature and cannot result in lapsing of reservation.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment