Kangana Ranaut had moved a plea in the Bombay High Court challenging the BMC's demolition activity
Kangana Ranaut had moved a plea in the Bombay High Court challenging the BMC's demolition activity
Litigation News

BMC’s actions were a counterblast of the displeasure of persons in power: Kangana Ranaut's amended plea in Bombay HC seeks Rs 2 Cr damages

The action initiated by the BMC's officials was a counterblast of the displeasure of influential persons who are in power and who are displeased by certain causes being taken up by Kangana, states her petition.

Lydia Suzanne Thomas

Actor Kangana Ranaut has filed an amended writ petition in her plea against the BMC's bid to demolish a portion of her bungalow in Mumbai. The Corporation's actions were halted by the Bombay High Court after Ranaut moved the plea, earlier this month.

On September 10, her Counsel Rizwan Siddique had sought leave from the High Court to amend the plea to incorporate new facts.

Following the Court's permission to do the same, an amended writ petition has been filed in the High Court which also seeks Rs 2 crores as compensation for the demolition already carried out by the BMC.

Ranaut informs in her petition that she had purchased the bungalow in 2017 after which she carried out repairs on the building, stated to be more than 40 years old.

The BMC's order for the demolition of her property has been challenged, with Kangana averring that she had duly complied with applicable norms while renovating her bungalow. The amended petition also makes mention of her recent spat with the Maharashtra Government over her comments on the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput.

"The Petitioner states and firmly believes that the entire action initiated by the Respondent No.1’s officials was a counterblast and a consequence of the displeasure of influential persons who are in power who are displeased and angry by certain causes being taken up by Petitioner."
Kangana Ranaut

The amended plea narrates that she had sought permission from the Corporation before she undertook structural repairs of the property. The Corporation had given her the requisite permissions to conduct structural repairs upon her property, directing the submission of a structural stability certificate.

Last year, Ranaut had additionally applied for permission to fix leakage and conduct another renovation. These permissions were also granted, her plea records.

On September 8, the BMC is stated to have asked Ranaut to respond to two questions:

  • To stop the erection of the building/execution of the renovations; or

  • To produce documentary evidence proving authorization for ‘the works carried out’

A group formed by the Corporation entered the premises after manhandling security staff, it is stated.

After this, without waiting for Ranaut's response, the BMC is contended to have begun the demolition of her bungalow, which she submits destroyed 40% of her property.

It is submitted that rare pieces, antiques, furniture, fittings, and structures have been destroyed. Further assessment will have to be undertaken to ascertain the extent of the damage, she states.

"... Respondent No. 2 and the officials of the Respondent No. 1(MCGM/BMC) demolished about 40% of the Petitioner’s property including the valuable movable property of the Bungalow, like chandeliers, sofa, rare arts-works before the Petitioner’s advocate obtained stay from this Hon’ble Court. Apart from the illegal demolition, the Respondent No.1’s officials demolished/destroyed illegally the following articles/structures i) Three seater vintage sofa ii) Two seater Vintage Sofa iii) Coffee Table iv) Two Antique Mirrors v) Editing equipment and desktop vi) crystal chandelier on ground floor vii) Italian lights on first floor viii) exclusive designer chair ix) music speakers on ground floor x) Antique pieces xi) cashmere shawl xii) coffee machine on ground floor xiii) Victorian cutlery xiv) cushions and rugs on the ground floor xv) show pieces on the ground floor xvi) 10-15 first edition books collected over the years from all across the world xii) 7 Gigantic planters including plants worth Rupees Fifty Thousand each which were not even a part of the Impugned Notice. A further assessment needs to be done by the Petitioner of the entirety of the illegal demolition."

Craving the Court's intervention in annulling the BMC's order, Ranaut has also prayed for an order restraining the BMC from conducting further demolitions on the property in the interim.

Further, Ranaut has also prayed for the grant of Rs 2 crores as towards damages suffered due to the illegal demolition of the structures on her bungalow.

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news