Bombay High Court

Bombay HC: MCGM Must Follow Legal Steps Before Evicting Empire Building Residents

Updated
Dec 2, 2025 10:56 AM
bombay-hc-mcgm-must-follow-legal-steps-before-evicting-empire-building-residents

Quick Summary: The Bombay High Court has decided that the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) cannot force the Empire Building residents to leave without following the proper legal steps. The case, involving a long-standing argument over lease rights, highlights the importance of following legal rules when dealing with property issues.

Background of the Case

The disagreement is about a building called Mahendra Chambers, which used to be known as Empire Building, located on Plot No. A1 at DN Road, Mumbai. The land was originally rented out for 99 years starting in 1901. Over time, the lease was transferred to the Parsi Panchayat, who later passed it on to Mahendra Builders.

Lease Expiry and Legal Battle

The lease ended on December 13, 2000. The MCGM argued that the lease transfer to Mahendra Builders was not valid after it ended, claiming the land went back to them. However, Mahendra Builders disagreed, saying they still had the right to the property.

Court Proceedings and Judgment

  • Initial Appeals: The Empire Building Occupants Welfare Association and MCGM both challenged a 2019 decision that favored Mahendra Builders.
  • Supreme Court Involvement: The Supreme Court allowed these challenges to be heard, emphasizing the need for a quick resolution.
  • Final Hearing: On December 1, 2025, Judges M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna ruled in favor of the residents, stressing that MCGM must follow proper legal steps to remove them.

"Possession can be resumed by government only in a manner known to or recognised by law."

Key Arguments

  • MCGM's Position: They argued that the Parsi Panchayat had no right to pass on the lease after it ended, and that the property legally went back to them.
  • Residents' Defense: Mahendra Builders, with support from the Parsi Panchayat, argued that MCGM's actions were inconsistent, pointing to approvals and communications after the lease ended.

Court's Reasoning

The court found that the residents had been living there for over 25 years and that MCGM's attempt to take back the property without following the rules was unfair. The court highlighted the need for legal steps in solving such arguments.

Legal Implications

The judgment emphasizes that even organizations with more rights, like MCGM, must follow legal steps before removing current residents. This decision serves as a reminder of the court's role in protecting property rights and following the law.

Summary of the Verdict

The court's decision is a significant win for the Empire Building residents, ensuring they can stay until the correct legal process is followed. This case sets an example for how similar property arguments should be handled in the future.

Tags:
Property Rights
Maharashtra Rent Control Act
Eviction