Hindustan Times ST (Mumbai) - HT Navi Mumbai Live

HC rejects actor’s plea to stay demolition notice

THE ACTOR HAD APPROACHED THE HC AFTER THE CITY CIVIL COURT REJECTED PLEA

- Abbas.dodhiya@htlive.com PRATIK CHORGE/HT

K A Y Dodhiya

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) on Thursday rejected an appeal filed by actor Sonu Sood who had sought a stay on the demolition notice issued by the Brihanmumb­ai Municipal Corporatio­n (BMC) on October 27, 2020 against the alleged structural changes he had made to the Shakti Sagar building in Juhu.

The actor had approached the HC after the city civil court at Dindoshi rejected his applicatio­n in December last year.

The single-judge bench of justice Prithviraj Chavan had heard the actor’s applicatio­n on January 13 wherein he had sought a restraint against the BMC from taking any action based on its October 27 notice and also sought a stay on the operation of civil court order.

In their applicatio­n before the high court, Sood and his wife informed the court through advocate DP Singh that they did not carry out any illegal or unauthoris­ed constructi­on in the six-storey Shakti Sagar building. The actor had submitted that the city civil court had failed to consider that the notice was issued by BMC as its illegal demands were not satisfied.

Advocate Amogh Singh, appearing for the actor, told the court that the BMC notice was vague as it did not mention the nature of the alleged alteration­s and the BMC official concerned had not responded to the actor’s reply to the notice, hence the BMC notice had malafide intent and was in contravent­ion of the provisions of the Maharashtr­a Regional and Town Planning Act. However, BMC refuted the allegation­s made by the actor and submitted that the actor and his wife were “habitual offenders”. An affidavit filed by the designated officer of the

K-West ward through advocate Joel Carlos submitted, “It is stated that the appellants are habitual offenders and want to enjoy the commercial proceeds of their unauthoris­ed work and therefore once again started reconstruc­ting the demolished portion in order to make it operationa­l as the hotel.”

Senior counsel Anil Sakhare, appearing for the BMC, submitted that Sood could not be permitted to continue with the commercial activity of running a residentia­l hotel and hence sought dismissal of his applicatio­n. After hearing the arguments, the bench refused to accept the request of Sood’s lawyer for 10 weeks’ time to comply with the BMC’s process as the relevant clearance from the Maharashtr­a Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA) was delayed due to the Covid-19 pandemic. While dismissing the applicatio­n the court observed, “You (Sonu Sood) are too late. You’ve ample opportunit­y and law helps those who are diligent.”

 ??  ?? Shakti Sagar building, Juhu; Sonu Sood.
Shakti Sagar building, Juhu; Sonu Sood.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India