LexRAVINDRA RAMCHANDRA WAGHMARE versus INDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2016] 9 S.C.R. 373
RAVINDRA RAMCHANDRA WAGHMARE
v.
INDORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 11307 of2016)
NOVEMBER 29, 2016
[JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND ARUN MISHRA, JJ.]
Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956:
A
B
s.305 - Rapid Transport System - BRTS corridor scheme for
improvement of public transport system - Widening of public roads
C
for BRTS corridor - Action taken by Municipal Corporation u/s.305
for removal of building projecting beyond regular line of public
street -
Propriety of. challenged by land owners - Held: The
opening part of s.305(1) and latter part after clause (b) make it
clear that a building or a part of the portion which projects into the
periphery of regular line of public street can be removed - The
D
provisions of s.305 cast a mandate upon the Corporation to remove
whatever is projecting beyond the regular line of public street - No
fault in action taken by Corporation.
s.305 - Deemed vesting - Held: The vesting takes place, as
soon as the building is removed or notice is served for the building
E
to be set back - As soon as the building or the projecting part is
removed or when the Corporation issues a notice when such re-
building shall be set back or to the front line, the line added by
such action by setting back or removal, shall henceforth without
any further formalities, be deemed to be a part of public street and
F
shall vest in the Corporation - Vesting does not depend upon the
volition of the owner - Considering the deeming fiction in s.305
and y'!_stinf{ provision, de jure and de facto possession automatically
vest in the Corporation on the happening of the exigencies as
provided in s.305 - Municipalities - Expropriatory legislation -
Interpretation of statute.
G
s.305 - No specific provision for taking over possession -
Held: By deeming fiction, vesting takes place, as such there was no
necessity of specific provision for taking over of the possession
that is implicit in the deeming part and vesting of the property by
373
H
374
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2016] 9 S.C.R.
legal fiction.
ss.305, 306, 387 - Compensation - Relevant provisions in
the Act - Held: s.387 provides for procedure in case compensation
determined u/s.306 is not acceptable - Dissatisfied claimants can
resort to s.387 which require determination of dispute by Panchayat/
arbitration, and in case arbitration fails, parties can approach the
District Court ll'hich shall follow the procedure provided in Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 - The provision of s.387 is very wide and
covers all the cases in ll'hich an agreement is not arrived at with
respect lo compensation or damages which are under the Act directed
to be paid - s.387 would cover the provisions of compensation
payable under ss.305 and 306 of the Act of 1956 - ss.305 and 306
use the expression 'reasonable compensation has to be paid· which
would mean, reasonable on the principle acceptable in accordance
with law -
Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
ss.305, 78, 79 - Public street - Acquisition whether can be
resorted u/ss. 78, 79 - Held: The language of s.305 is plain, simple
and clear - The exigencies when the notice can be issued including
the vesting part and deeming fiction are very clear - There is no
omission or lacunae, much less casus omissus in the provisions
contained in s.305 of the Act - lf the provision as lo public street is
made dependent upon the acquisition of land. the very purpose
behind the provisions of s.305 would be frustrated - Development
plan once prepared is binding upon the Development Authorities in
the planning area as well as on the Municipal Corporation and the
local authorities and all concerned including owners -
lf the land
falls in a regular line of public street. 110 construction can be raised
and no projection can be made by 011•11er whereas it can be removed
or set back, as the case may be - 111 case acquisition is resorted to
under ss. 78 and 79, public street can never be widened and the
entire purpose of preparation of Development Plan shall stand
defeated.
s.305 - Removal of building falling in regular line of public
street - Applicability of Maxim "Generalia specialibus non derogant
and Generalibus specialia derogant" - Held: Recourse to the provisions
of acquisition under ss. 78 and 79 is clearly ousted by the special
provision contained in s.305 of the Act of 1956-,- Being a special
provision with respect toExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.