The Bombay High Court has held that Sections 297 and 299 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 cannot be invoked to take possession of private land where there is no existing public street over the portion sought to be acquired. The Court further held that the statutory power under Sections 297 and 299 cannot be extended to an exercise which would substantially and actually dismember an existing factory.

A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhand was hearing a writ petition challenging notices issued under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act proposing to prescribe a 12.20-metre-wide regular line of Aatmaram Bhoir Marg and consequently acquire a portion of the petitioner's property.

The Petitioners submitted that the area being sought for acquisition (between point C and D) was neither an existing road nor a public street and formed part of their private property, which had remained in their exclusive possession and control. They contended that acquisition of the land would split the functioning factory and affect the factory stores, workers' canteen, administrative area, discharge facilities and space used for loading and unloading.

The Court noted that the Petitioners have been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the property under issue since 1957. It further noted that the portion between C and D formed part of the Petitioners' factory, though it is shown as part of Aatmaram Bhoir Marg in the sanctioned Development Plan.

The Court observed that Section 297 empowers the Commissioner to prescribe a regular line of a street and Section 299 enables possession of land which lies within the regular line of a public street. However, it held that the Respondents could not take possession of the Petitioners' private land between points C and D by invoking Sections 297 and 299 in the facts of the case.

“The impact of the proposed acquisition therefore, substantially and actually dismembers an existing factory by invoking a provision which is intended to deal with land and structures falling within the regular line of a public street in the circumstances contemplated by that provision,” the Court remarked.

The Court also observed that there was no possibility of the connector being used to reduce traffic congestion or pollution or to provide access to the Municipal Garden from Lake Road, thus refuting the contention of public interest. The Court observed that there was also some merit in the submission that the exercise may have been initiated at the instance of a developer of a nearby plot seeking connectivity from two sides.

“It also appears that the issue of taking over a part of the Petitioners' property is at the behest of a representation made by an elected representative as is relied upon in the affidavit filed by the Corporation. In our view, the statutory power under Section 297 and 299 cannot be extended to such an exercise,” the Court noted.

Accordingly, the Court partly allowed the petition, quashing the notices dated July 5, 2024 and April 1, 2025 issued under Section 299 insofar as they sought possession of the Petitioners' land between points C and D.

Case Title: Newkem Products Corporation v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai [Writ Petition No. 540 of 2026]

Click Here To Read/Download Order