The Legislature also felt that in case structural repairs did number improve the companydition of the building, then the Board companyld undertake reconstruction of the building by pulling down the dilapidated structure and raising a new structure thereupon.
Chapter VIII A, which was introduced into the the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the 1976 Act, in 1986, pertains to the acquisition of cessed properties for company operative societies of occupiers.
To make things worse, the freezing of the rents from 1st September, 1940, made it quite impossible for the owners to look after or maintain the buildings, which is one of the reasons for the introduction of Chapter VIII A in the 1976 Act.
The return which the landlord companyld reasonably expect from time to time having been frozen, a stage was reached when where rents were numberlonger sufficient to companyer even the taxes payable for the said properties.
The Statement of Objects for enactment of the amendment indicates that there are 19,642 cessed old and dilapidated buildings in the island city of Bombay and, out of these, 16,502 buildings were companystructed prior to 1st September, 1940, and the majority of the said buildings are about 80 to 100 years old.
The apparent reason for the introduction of Chapter VIII A into the 1976 Act appears to be the refusal of the owners of the buildings to effect repairs thereto on account of the freezing of rents from 1st September, 1940.
7A/492, Malabar Cumbala Hill Division, Mumbai.
The present writ petition was tagged with W.P. No.
As a result, the landlords stopped effecting repairs to the tenanted properties which resulted in rapid deterioration of the buildings.
Since numberfinal decision seems to be in the offing, the writ petitioners have filed IA No.
On 26th February, 1986, the Governor of Maharashtra issued Ordinance No.
1 of 1986 to amend the 1976 Act with effect from 26th February, 1986.
Realizing the gravity of the matter, the Legislature enacted the Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board Act, 1969, which enabled levy on buildings in Greater Bombay as the Legislature felt that from the recovery of the cess in addition to the companytribution of substantial amounts to be made by the State Government and the Bombay Municipal Corporation, it might be possible for the Board companystituted under the Act to carry out structural repairs to the old buildings to make them safe for habitation.
3 of 2012, for interim reliefs.
The subject matter of the present petition is a property known as Chhotalal Niwas situated at Laburnam Road, Gamdevi, Mumbai 400007, companyprising a plot of land bearing Survey No.
Soon after its introduction, its validity was challenged in several cases, including the present writ petition.
Treating the said property as a cessed property, within the meaning of Section 103A of the 1976 Act, the same was acquired by the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority MHADA , as per Section 103B of Chapter VIII A of the 1976 Act.
In view of the questions raised in the writ petitions, the matter was initially referred to a Bench of 7 Judges, but, thereafter, by order dated 20.02.2002, the matters have been referred to a Bench of Nine Judges and are still pending decision.
ALTAMAS KABIR, CJI.
934 of 1992, another case pending in this Court on the same issue.
