This is significant since the Indian Forest Act, 1927 did number apply to waste land due to the Indian Forest Bombay Amendment Act, 1948 with effect from 4th December 1948.
The companysent decree reads, inter alia, as follows AND THIS COURT by and with such companysent DOTH FUTHER DECLARE that it is agreed by and between the parties of the following lands namely No.
In both development plans, the disputed land was designated as R or Residential.
Area G.A. 15 Part 0 21 0 16 Part 0 10 0 0 31 0 in the village of Vikhroli vest in Government under Section 4 c of the said Act Salsette Estates Act.
However, the lands of Bhabha Atomic Energy Complex and the Employees State Insurance Scheme Hospital were number touched by the State.
On publication of the first development plan, Godrej applied for and was granted permission, on various dates, by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay to companystruct residential buildings on the disputed land.
Pursuant to the grant of exemption, Godrej applied for and was granted permission by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay to companystruct multi storeyed buildings on the disputed land.
ii It was acknowledged by the State that the disputed land even if it was a forest was appropriated or brought under cultivation by Godrej before 14th August 1951.
413 of 1953 was filed by Godrej in the Bombay High Court praying, inter alia, for a declaration that it was the owner of the disputed land in village Vikhroli as the successor in title of Framjee Cawasjee Banaji that the provisions of the Salsette Estates Act had numberapplication to the disputed land and, that the disputed land had been appropriated by Godrej before 14th August 1951 for its industrial undertaking.
WT/53 had been issued to various parties in 1956 57, including to the Bhabha Atomic Energy Complex and the Employees State Insurance Scheme Hospital.
AND THIS COURT by and with such companysent DOTH FURTHER DECLARE that it is agreed by and between the parties that save and except the lands mentioned above all other lands in the village of Vikhroli were appropriated or brought under cultivation before the fourteenth day of August one thousand nine hundred and fifty one and are the property of the Plaintiff.
During the proceedings in the High Court it came to be known that about 170 numberices similar to numberice No.
This factual position was disputed by Godrej and to resolve the dispute, Suit No.
Godrej is said to have companystructed four such buildings on the basis of permissions granted from time to time and these building were occupied for residential purposes by its staff.
Development Plan for the City of Bombay A development plan for the City of Bombay and Greater Bombay including Vikhroli was published on 7th January 1967 and the next development plan was published in 1991.
On 17th February 1976 the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 came into force.
The suit was companytested by the State by filing a written statement but eventually the Bombay High Court passed a companysent decree on 8th January 1962 to the effect that except for an area of 31 gunthas, all other lands were appropriated and brought under cultivation by Godrej before 14th August 1951 and are the property of Godrej.
Madan B. Lokur, J. Leave granted.
The land was described in the perpetual lease kowl as waste land and one of the purposes of the lease was to cultivate the waste land.
This statute was brought into force on 1st March 1952.
These events establish two facts i Even according to the State, the disputed land was waste land and number a forest.
