{"id":205319,"date":"2008-10-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-07-10T01:23:54","modified_gmt":"2017-07-09T19:53:54","slug":"mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008<\/div>\n
Bench: J.N. Patel, S. J. Kathawalla<\/div>\n
                                     -1-\n\n\n\n\n    mgj\n\n                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n\n\n\n                                                                         \n                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n                        Writ Petition No. 710       of 2008\n\n\n\n\n                                                 \n          Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora              ..Petitioner\n\n          vs.\n\n\n\n\n                                                \n          1. The Municipal Corporation\n           of the City of Thane and anr.          ..Respondents<\/pre>\n
          Shri V.B.Naik i\/b M\/s Dhruv Liladhar and Co. for
\n          petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
          Shri R.S.Apte for respondent no.1<\/p>\n
          Shri C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for respondent no.2.\n<\/p>\n
                                    CORAM: J.N.PATEL &
\n                                        S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ.\n<\/p>\n
                                        7th October, 2008<\/p>\n
          ORAL JUIDGMENT:(Per S.J.KATHAWALLA J.).\n<\/p>\n
          1.     Heard the learned Advocates appearing for                    the<\/p>\n
          parties.\n<\/p>\n
          2.    Rule.   Rule made returnable forthwith.                Learned<\/p>\n
          Advocates     for   the respondents waive service.                    By<\/p>\n
          consent, Rule taken up for hearing.\n<\/p>\n
          3.    The petitioner is the owner of the land bearing<\/p>\n
          Survey    No.    326A, Plot No.1, admeasuring               18058.50<\/p>\n
          sq.meters       along    with    the   structures           standing<\/p>\n
          thereon    situate      at village Majiwada, Mohan               Mills<\/p>\n
                                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                    -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
     Compound,        Ghodbunder     Road,     Taluka       and      District<\/p>\n
     Thane.       (the      said property).      Respondent No.1               is<\/p>\n
     the    Municipal        Corporation of      Thane.          Respondent<\/p>\n
     no.2    is the State of Maharashtra.               Pursuant to the<\/p>\n
     order    dated      9th September, 1996 the              Ministry         of<\/p>\n
     Environment and Forests, Government of India by its<\/p>\n
     notification        dated 28th November, 1996 constituted<\/p>\n
     an    Authority known as “Authority for Environmental<\/p>\n
     Planning      for      Thane”   (the said       Authority).             The<\/p>\n
     object      of    the said Authority were to              assess        the<\/p>\n
     environmental impact of industries in Thane and any<\/p>\n
     area appurtenant thereto which was to be demarcated<\/p>\n
     by     the       said    Authority      for     the      purpose          of<\/p>\n
     environmental           planning     of       Thane           including<\/p>\n
     relocation of the industries.\n<\/p>\n
     4.     By    its letter dated 22nd July,               1997      bearing<\/p>\n
     No.DEPT\/N\/605          the   said   Authority        submitted          its<\/p>\n
     final    report        to the Ministry of        Environment            and<\/p>\n
     Forests, Government of India, and other departments<\/p>\n
     including        the    Urban    Development         Department           of<\/p>\n
     respondent        no.2    wherein several suggestions                  were<\/p>\n
     made    including that there should be a safety                        belt<\/p>\n
     of    250    meters from the chemical storage tanks                       of<\/p>\n
     various       chemical       industries       and      the      chemical<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                 -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
     industries     should be phazed out.            Pursuant to            the<\/p>\n
     said   final     report    of the    authority,            the      Urban<\/p>\n
     Development      Department      issued notification                dated<\/p>\n
     28th   October,     1997    under     section           154     of     the<\/p>\n
     M.R.T.P.Act,       1966     giving       directions            to      the<\/p>\n
     Respondent no.1 for granting development permission<\/p>\n
     around    hazardous chemical industries.                 However, no<\/p>\n
     clarifications\/directions          were        issued        regarding<\/p>\n
     phasing    out the chemical Industries in future,                        as<\/p>\n
     suggested inthe final report of the said Authority.\n<\/p>\n
     The legality and validity of the notification dated<\/p>\n
     28th   October, 1997 was challenged in Writ Petition<\/p>\n
     No,.2094    of    2001    which    was     disposed          of     by     a<\/p>\n
     judgment    and    order dated 19th July, 2002 of                     this<\/p>\n
     Court.      The    writ    petition        was        allowed          and<\/p>\n
     respondent     no.1 was directed to consider,                   approve<\/p>\n
     and    sanction the building plans of the petitioners<\/p>\n
     therein    in accordance with the Development Control<\/p>\n
     Regulations       as     beyond    the       purview           of      the<\/p>\n
     Notification        dated         28th         October,             1997.\n<\/p>\n
     Subsequently      in writ petition Nos.8385 and 8928 of<\/p>\n
     2003, this Court by an order dated 17th March, 2004<\/p>\n
     also   clarified that the interpretation of the said<\/p>\n
     Notification      dated    28th    October,         1997       by     this<\/p>\n
     Hon’ble Court by its order dated 19th July, 2002 in<\/p>\n
                                               ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                   -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
     Writ    Petition      No.2094      of    2001    applies         to     all<\/p>\n
     similarly      situated      companies\/parties              and        that<\/p>\n
     notification        is   not    restricted to          a    particular<\/p>\n
     site.\n<\/p>\n
     5.     The    petitioner who is the owner of                  the      said<\/p>\n
     property      by    indenture dated 28th           November,           2002<\/p>\n
     granted      lease    in favour of IOL          Infotech         (India)<\/p>\n
     Ltd.     of the portion of the said property on terms<\/p>\n
     and conditions mentioned therein.                The petitioner’s<\/p>\n
     Architect<\/p>\n
                    by application dated 22nd November, 2007<\/p>\n
     requested      respondent       no.1 to revise the plans                  on<\/p>\n
     the    basis    of 1.00 F.S.I.          By the said letter              the<\/p>\n
     petitioner      pointed      out that the        respondents            had<\/p>\n
     granted      0.5    F.S.I.     on the basis that as per                 the<\/p>\n
     development        plan the petitioner’s plot is shown as<\/p>\n
     of low density of M\/s Raghunandan Chemical Co.                          and<\/p>\n
     that    since      the said M\/s Raghunanand Chemical                    Co.\n<\/p>\n
     is    closed    down and is not in existence and                     since<\/p>\n
     petitioner’s        plot   is    used      for     residence            the<\/p>\n
     chemical      strip shown on the plot is required to be<\/p>\n
     removed      and released and revised plan for 1.00 FSI<\/p>\n
     be granted.        However, respondent no.1 by its letter<\/p>\n
     dated    8th January, 2008 rejected the                  petitioner’s<\/p>\n
     application.         The   petitioner’s application                  dated<\/p>\n
                                                ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                     -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
     22nd    November,      2007      for     sanction           of      revised<\/p>\n
     building      plans    was      rejected on the             ground        that<\/p>\n
     there    is no change in the revised building                         plans.\n<\/p>\n
     It   is the petitioner’s case that it is an admitted<\/p>\n
     fact    that    the said chemical company                   has     already<\/p>\n
     closed     down     and in Writ Petition No.5294 of                       2004<\/p>\n
     filed    by    the    same chemical company                 against        the<\/p>\n
     respondent      no.1      and    another, this Court                by     its<\/p>\n
     order    dated      8th    July,       2004      had      directed         the<\/p>\n
     respondent      no.1      to    consider         the      proposal           of<\/p>\n
     amendment<\/p>\n
                    of    the    plans      of   the       said         chemical<\/p>\n
     company.       The petitioner has also pointed out that<\/p>\n
     another land belonging to one Sulzar Pumps which is<\/p>\n
     adjacent      to    the    chemical      company          has      received<\/p>\n
     permission for development of residential buildings<\/p>\n
     on   its    land on the ground that the said                       chemical<\/p>\n
     company       is    not    in     existence.              Infact,          the<\/p>\n
     Respondent      no.1      has already granted               commencement<\/p>\n
     certificate        dated    11th     November, 2004              and      also<\/p>\n
     occupation certificate dated 25th July, 2007 to the<\/p>\n
     said Sulzar Pumps.\n<\/p>\n
     6.     The petitioner, therefore, submitted that                           the<\/p>\n
     chemical      belts demarcated in the development                         plan<\/p>\n
     should     not be a hindrance to the grant of approval<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                   -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
     and    commencement        certificate of the               petitioner’s<\/p>\n
     building      plans    with      FSI of 1.00.             The      chemical<\/p>\n
     company      itself has shut down in the year 1990                         and<\/p>\n
     that    respondent      no.1      has    approved           and     granted<\/p>\n
     commencement       certificate          for        construction              of<\/p>\n
     residential      buildings on the land of the                      chemical<\/p>\n
     company      itself.    The petitioner has, therefore, by<\/p>\n
     this    writ    petition        impugned         the      rejection          by<\/p>\n
     respondent      no.1    to sanction the revised                    building<\/p>\n
     plans submitted by the developers.\n<\/p>\n
     7.     The    learned      Counsel for the            petitioner           has<\/p>\n
     produced before this Court the Resolution passed by<\/p>\n
     the    General    Body      of respondent no.1               dated        19th<\/p>\n
     July,    2008    wherein        clause (D)         of     the      proposed<\/p>\n
     modification to Clause N1.3 reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
               “the land under Chemical Industry, which is<\/p>\n
               closed      or    allowed      to      be     shifted         under<\/p>\n
               Industrial        Act,    shall        be allowed           to     be<\/p>\n
               developed        as    per the Development                Control<\/p>\n
               Regulation,        1995.       The green belt of                 100<\/span><\/p>\n
               mtr.and      further 150 mts.             Low Density belt<\/p>\n
               around such closed or shifted Company shall<\/p>\n
               suo-motto         cease    to        exist        after         such<\/p>\n
                                                   ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                                   -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
                 permissions are granted.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     After    passing      the above Resolution the             Municipal<\/p>\n
     Corporation        has invited objections from the public<\/p>\n
     under       the     M.R.T.P.Act.       The    petitioner             has<\/p>\n
     submitted      that the Municipal Corporation can                   take<\/p>\n
     decision      on    the    subject matter     of      the     present<\/p>\n
     petition       after      receiving    objections          from      the<\/p>\n
     public.       It    is    the case of the State          Govt.         in<\/p>\n
     their    affidavit        dated 6th September,         2008       filed<\/p>\n
     before<\/p>\n
                 this Court that Thane Municipal Corporation<\/p>\n
     can     grant      development      permission        only        after<\/p>\n
     modification of the D.P.           and D.C.R.       is sanctioned<\/p>\n
     by    the Government under section 37(2) of the                     MRTP<\/p>\n
     Act.\n<\/p>\n
     9.     In    view    thereof, we direct       respondent            No.1<\/p>\n
     Municipal      Corporation of Thane to take a                decision<\/p>\n
     in    respect of modification of development plan                      in<\/p>\n
     pursuance      of resolution dated 19th July, 2008                   and<\/p>\n
     pass    appropriate        orders on the plan submitted                by<\/p>\n
     the    petitioner within a period of four weeks after<\/p>\n
     seeking approval from the State Government.\n<\/p>\n
     10.     Rule      made absolute in the above           terms.          No<\/p>\n
                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>
\n                            -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
     order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
     (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.)          (J.N.PATEL J.)<\/p>\n
                                 ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 13:56:47 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 Bench: J.N. Patel, S. J. Kathawalla -1- mgj IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 710 of 2008 Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora ..Petitioner vs. 1. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane and anr. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-205319","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1216,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008"},"wordCount":1216,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008","name":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-09T19:53:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohankumar-jaigopal-arora-vs-the-municipal-corporation-on-7-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohankumar Jaigopal Arora vs The Municipal Corporation on 7 October, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205319","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=205319"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205319\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=205319"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=205319"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=205319"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}