Bombay High Court Takes Strong Stand Against Illegal Encroachments
In a significant ruling that sends a clear message against illegal encroachments, the Bombay High Court has dismissed appeals filed by occupants of eight unauthorized structures located on housing society land adjacent to Kandivli West railway station. The court delivered a strongly worded judgment that characterized the appellants as illegal hawkers and land grabbers who exploit high-footfall areas around railway stations for their commercial activities.
Justice Jadhav's Strong Observations on Railway Station Encroachments
Justice Milind Jadhav, while upholding the city civil court's refusal to stay the demolition of these structures, made scathing observations about the widespread problem of illegal encroachments around Mumbai's suburban railway stations. "These appellants before me are nothing but illegal hawkers and land grabbers which grab any vacant spaces outside railway stations, which are high density footfall areas for hawking their business," Justice Jadhav stated in his Wednesday ruling.
The judge expressed serious concern about how this menace has spread across Mumbai city, describing it as spreading "like a disease" outside all suburban railway stations. The eight structures in question are situated on Nemi Krishna CHS's land outside platform number 1 of Kandivli station, highlighting the persistent nature of such encroachments in prime locations.
Long Legal Battle Reaches Final Chapter
The legal history of this case dates back to 1999 when a suit was initially filed against 27 occupants, including the current appellants. After a prolonged legal battle that spanned over two decades, the matter reached the Supreme Court, which decided against the occupants in September 2024. Following this Supreme Court decision, occupants of eight structures—including six that had changed hands—filed fresh suits before the city civil court, claiming ownership of the structures and obtaining interim protection from demolition.
Representing the housing society, advocates Karl Tamboly and Mehul Rathod argued that the eight appellants had completely suppressed information about previous legal proceedings involving the same structures. While advocate Aseem Naphade, representing two of the occupants, admitted their structures were part of the earlier litigation, advocate P J Thorat, representing the other six, claimed his clients' structures were not involved in the previous case.
Court Rejects Occupants' Claims and Documents
The appellants had relied on several documents to support their claims, including their long-standing possession of the properties, census documents, and BMC repair permissions. However, Justice Jadhav categorically stated that these documents "do not prove they are owners of the suit premises." The judge noted that all eight structures involved in the current appeal had been part of the previous litigation and had been granted substantial opportunities to prove their case while enjoying the protection of interim injunctions for years.
Justice Jadhav emphasized the need for a strong judicial response, stating: "The time has come to send a strong message to such illegal hawkers and land grabbers that rule of law prevails in this country." He highlighted multiple public inconveniences caused by such encroachments, noting that these hawkers and appellants never pay taxes, inconvenience the general public, litter public areas, and forcibly occupy land belonging to others before approaching courts seeking due process before eviction.
Substantial Costs and Clear Directions
In his concluding remarks, Justice Jadhav determined that the appellants had no legal right to occupy the society's land "which they did from 1999 to 2025"—a period spanning 26 years. The court imposed exemplary costs totaling Rs 3.5 lakh, directing the amount to be paid to the Kirtikar Law Library at the High Court. The judge also refused to grant any stay on the judgment, allowing the demolition proceedings to move forward.
This landmark judgment establishes an important precedent for dealing with illegal encroachments around Mumbai's railway stations and sends a clear message that courts will not tolerate land grabbing activities that compromise public spaces and inconvenience citizens.
