any benefits against the said acquisition of lands.

The Plaintiff
states that now she is in use, occupation and possession in the
suit premises and she is also having all the documentary evidence
which shows that the suit premises existence before 2007. The
Plaintiff states that the as per resolution amended on 18/10/2011
where in it was confirmed that whoever has constructed prior to
year 2007, then she is entitled to get the houses regularized as per
the said Resolution of the said Corporation. The Plaintiff states
that as per the said Resolution, the suit premises is liable to be
protected and she is legal owner of the suit premises because same
is constructed for legal necessity. The Plaintiff states that on
19/04/2021, she made Representation dated 19/04/2021 to the
CIDCO and requested them to regularize the suit premises being
Project affected person. But till this date the CIDCO has not given
any benefits to the Plaintiff and her family members against the
said land acquisition and also not replied the said Letters. The
Plaintiff states that she and her husband also requested to officers
of the CIDCO to regularize the suit premises or adjust entitlement
on the suit premises against the said acquisition of lands.

9. The Plaintiff states that suddenly the Defendant issued

Notice dated 15/07/2021 under Section 53(1)(a) of Maharashtra
Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 in her name thereby alleging
that the Plaintiff has constructed RCC Construction of G+2 of the
‘suit premises illegally in area admeasuring 1 Gunthas and directed
to the Plaintiff to remove the suit premises within 24 hours,
otherwise the Defendant will take action of demolition of the suit
premises. The Plaintiff states that Notice issued by the Defendant
and he is not Gazzatee Officer. Therefore, Notice dated
15/07/2021 issued by the Defendants itself is illegal, void and
same is nullity. The Plaintiff states that the said Notice is not as
per provisions of law because she has also not carried out any
illegal construction of the suit premises and same is existing prior
to 2007. The Plaintiff states that the Defendant has not given
suflicient opportunity to the Plaintiff and the Defendant has not

considered her Representation Therefore, Notice dated

by the Defendants itself is illegal, void and

a
¥