RAJESH SHIVRAM KERKAR vs MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MHADA) — WP/1713/2025

Case under Mah. Housing & Area Devolopment Act Section 226. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM020289622024

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

Filing Number

WP/28955/2024

Filing Date

20-09-2024

Registration No

WP/1713/2025

Registration Date

07-05-2025

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK

Bench Type

Division

Category

TOWN PLANNING ( 39 )

Sub-Category

MHADA ( 6 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Acts & Sections

Mah. Housing & Area Devolopment Act Section 226

Petitioner(s)

RAJESH SHIVRAM KERKAR

Adv. Jeetendra Ranawat

Respondent(s)

MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MHADA)

MUMBAI HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (MHADA)

MUMBAI BUILDING REPAIRS AND RECONSTRUCTION BOARD (MBRRB/MBR AND R BOARD)

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK

04-03-2025

FOR ADMISSION

06-01-2025

FOR ADMISSION

20-01-2025

FOR ADMISSION

18-03-2025

FOR ADMISSION

24-04-2025

FOR ADMISSION

Orders

15-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK

Summary: The Bombay High Court ordered that petitioner Rajesh Kerkar be allotted a 380 sq. feet flat (instead of the originally promised 300 sq. feet) without paying the additional Rs. 16 lacs demanded by MHADA for the extra 80 sq. feet, finding prima facie that he cannot be forced to pay this amount given his financial constraints. The respondents were granted 3 weeks to file an affidavit-in-reply, and the petition was adjourned to 12 June 2026 for further consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Bombay High Court ordered that petitioner Rajesh Kerkar be allotted a 380 sq. feet flat (instead of the originally promised 300 sq. feet) without paying the additional Rs. 16 lacs demanded by MHADA for the extra 80 sq. feet, finding prima facie that he cannot be forced to pay this amount given his financial constraints. The respondents were granted 3 weeks to file an affidavit-in-reply, and the petition was adjourned to 12 June 2026 for further consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

Explore other courts

Search Another Case