The Bombay High Court has dismissed an application filed by tenants seeking to include a new builder in an ongoing redevelopment dispute involving a property on LBS Marg in Ghatkopar West, while imposing a cost of Rs 5 lakh on the applicants for what the court termed an “elite form of coercion and extortion” against the landlord.
The dispute relates to the redevelopment of a property measuring nearly 1,250 square metres, where more than 60 tenants had earlier approached the court over concerns regarding permanent alternate accommodation and redevelopment terms under Regulation 33(7)(A) of DCPR-2034.
During the proceedings, tenants claimed that the landlord had informally engaged a new developer who was allegedly involved in obtaining approvals, including the Intimation of Disapproval (IOD), Fire NOC, preparation of plans and discussions with occupants. The tenants also argued that the proposed developer participated in meetings and negotiations related to the redevelopment project and was granted extensions to support the project’s execution.
However, the landlord, represented by Advocate Dr. Uday Warunjikar and Advocate Nitesh Bhutekar, denied appointing the new builder and informed the court that no agreement had been executed with the proposed developer. The landlord’s legal team argued that the original developer continued to remain associated with the project and that including another builder in the proceedings would further complicate the dispute.
When questioned by the court, the tenants admitted that no formal contract or binding agreement existed between the landlord and the new builder. Taking note of this, the High Court observed that the application appeared to be an attempt to create rights where no enforceable agreement existed.
In its interim order dated May 6, 2026, the court stated that the attempt to add the proposed developer as a party amounted to misuse of the legal process. The court further observed that the application appeared to be financed and initiated to pressure the landlord into recognising the rights of the proposed builder despite the absence of any contractual relationship.
The High Court held that tenants cannot seek to implead a developer who has no privity of contract with the landlord in an ongoing redevelopment matter. It also noted that courts cannot be used as instruments to exert pressure or coerce parties during commercial disputes.
Accordingly, the court dismissed the application and directed the tenants to deposit Rs 5 lakh with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center within two weeks. The matter has been listed for compliance on June 15, 2026.
Source: The Economic Times
