high court judgement in april 2014 on supertech

5/25/2018 High Court Judgement in April 2014 on Supertech

1/38

1

A.F.R.Reserved

Court No. - 45

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 65085 of 2012

Petitioer :- !"era#d Court $%er Residet We#fareAsso&iatio

Res'odet :- (tate $f ).P. T*ru (e&+. Ad $t*ersCouse# for Petitioer :- A"it (a,eaua# Ravi(i/*Couse# for Res'odet :- C.(.C.(atis*ad*a+a(*iva" adav..(i/*

3o#e .. (*u#a7.3o#e (ueet u"ar7.

9e#ivered + (ueet u"ar7.The petitioner claims to be the recognized Resident

Welfare Association (RWA) of Emerald Court Group

Housing Societ and b means of this !rit petition the

petitioner see"s inter aliathe follo!ing reliefs#$

i. %ssue a !rit& order or direction 'uashing the

reised plan approed b respondent forconstruction of ne! to!ers namel To!er *A+E,* and

*CE-A.E* in plot no/ 0& Sector 12$A& and issue

further directions for demolishing of aforesaid

to!ers& the approal and construction being in

complete iolation of proisions of 3/+/ Apartments

Act of 454/

ii. %ssue a !rit& order or direction directing the

Respondent not to sanction amendments to an

further building plans in respect of the Group

Housing Societ being deeloped b respondent 6

!ithout obtaining consent of all the residents/

iii. %ssue a !rit& order or direction 'uashing the

permission granted to respondent 6 to lin" To!er

T$5 and T *A+E,* 7 *CE-A.CE* through space frame/


2/38

2

iv. %ssue a !rit& order or direction directing

respondents and 2 to ensure that fire safet

e'uipment and infrastructure is installed at the

e8penses of respondent 6 !ithin a specified period/

v. %ssue a !rit& order or direction directing

respondent to demolish illegal construction made

in the basement and setbac" area as per notice

dated 51/49/45 and 5:/4:/45/

vi.%ssue a !rit or direction directing respondent no/

and 6 to proide car par"ing spaces (both aboe

ground and in the basement) as per the proisions

of the .;C 446 to all the legal allottees7residents of

Supertech Emerald Court Comple8& plot 0& Section12$A .


3/38

3

sanctioned the laout plan on the aforementioned plot/

The .


4/38

4


5/38

5

strictl in accordance to the ;uilding Regulations of 454/

The respondent deeloper compan& on the other

hand& has 'uestioned the locus of the petitioner b

contending that the petitioner is not recognized b the

respondent deeloper compan under the 3ttar +radesh

Apartment (permission of construction& o!nership and

maintenance) Act& 454 (herein after referred to as the

Apartment Act& 454)/ The model be$la!s has not been

adopted b the petitioners& as such& the are not entitled

to become the member of Resident Welfare Association

(RWA) of Emerald Court +hase %/ Burther the +resident of

the said societ is not the o!ner of an apartment in the

societ& therefore& he cannot become the member of the

petitioners* societ& as per the proisions of the

Apartment Act& 454/ The impleadment of one of the

o!ners subse'uentl is an inherent defect/ Burther the

petitioner has an alternatie remed to first approach the

competent authorit under the Apartment Act& 454 i/e/the Chief E8ecutie


6/38

6

hae alread been sold to the prospectie buers thus

inaluable rights hae crstallized in faour of third part/

Brom the rial submissions the follo!ing 'uestions

need to be ans!ered#$

i. As to !hether the !rit petition ismaintainable at the behest of petitioner societ

ii. As to !hether the petitioner can be relegated

to alternatie remed under Section : of the

Apartment Act 454

iii. As to !hether the .59 5: (A+E, CE-A.E)

We hae heard Sri Dunal Rai Singh& learned counsel

for the petitioners& Sri Asho" ehta& Sr/ Adocate assisted

b Sri Shiam -ada on behalf of .


7/38

7

that decision is materiall aderse to him/ The restricted

meaning of the e8pression re'uires denial or depriation

of legal rights/ A more legal approach is re'uired in the

bac"ground of statues !hich do not deal !ith the

propert rights but deal !ith professional misconduct and

moralit/ (Bar Council of Maharastra vs. M.V.Dabholkar, (1!"# $ %CC !&$-11, 'aras $! $)#.

;roadl& spea"ing a part or a person is aggrieed

b a decision !hen& it onl operates directl and

inFuriousl upon his personal& pecuniar and proprietar

rights (Corpus uris Seundem/ Edn/ 5& ol/%/& p/ 269& as

referred in *alva %u+hakar e++ vs. Man+ala

%u+hakar e++, / $&&" 0 ", 'ara 1

The e8pression *person aggrieed* means a person

!ho has suffered a legal grieance i/e/ a person against

!hom a decision has been pronounced !hich has la!full

depried him of something or !rongfull refused him

something/

The Apartment Act& 454 !as notified b the State

Goernment on 51/2/454/ Chapter % deals !ith

Association of Apartment o!ners and be$la!s for the

registration of the affairs of such Association/ The

administration of the affairs in relation to the apartments

and management of common areas and facilit has been

conferred upon the Association under Section 50/ %t is the

Foint responsibilit of the promoter and the apartment

o!ners to form an association/ The promoter shall get the

association registered/ The Goernment ma& b

notification& frame model be$la!s in accordance !ith

!hich the propert referred to in Sub$section (5) shall be


8/38

8

administered b the Association of Apartment

the Association shall in its first meeting ma"e its be$la!s

in accordance !ith the model be$la!s so framed/ The

model be$la!s under Sub$section (9) of Section 50 !as

notified on 59/55/455/

As per the aerments of the respondent7compan&

the flats !ere handed oer to the apartment o!ners b

September 441/ The o!ners immediatel formed

Resident Welfare Association (RWA) and got it registered

!ith the Registrar Societies& in the er same ear/

Adopting the model be$la!s& did not arise& as it !as not

enforced until 455/ After notification of odel be$la!s&

the =eput Registrar Birm& Societies and Chits& eerut

ide letter dated 50/5/45 informed& that pending

instructions form the Registrar Birm Societies and Chits

3ttar +radesh& no decision in the matter can be ta"en in

respect of odel be$la!s and its registration/ The

Registrar Birm& Societies and Chits 3ttar +radesh idecircular dated 6//452 addressed to all =eput

Registrars7=istrict Registrars issued instructions for

registration under Apartment Act& 454 and directed that

be$la!s of e8isting RAW be accordingl amended/ The

petitioner7societ ide resolution dated 4/54/452

adopted the odel be$la!s and conducted elections and

thereafter informed the =eput Registrar/

The respondent7compan has recognized the

petitioners societ as RWA of the Apartment o!ners since

inception and has continuousl corresponded !ith the

petitioner societ as RWA/ >etter dated 1/54/45&

:/1/45& 0/1/45 and anuar& 452 addressed to thepetitioner societ regarding redressal of their grieance is


9/38

9

on record/ The petitioner societ has approached all the

authorities& including C/E/


10/38

10

24 of the Apartment Act& 454& the 3ttar +radesh

Apartment (+romotion of Construction&

aintenance) Rules& 455 (herein after referred to as

Apartment Rules& 455) !as framed/ Rule 2 of the

Apartment Rules& 455 prescribes the form of declaration

under sub$section (5) of section 5/ The declaration hasto be submitted !ithin 5 months from the date of

approal of the plans and in case !here the building has

been constructed or is under construction& prior to the

commencement of the rules& the declaration shall be

submitted !ithin 14 das from the date of such

commencement/ Rule 0 proides for the procedure for

amendment of the declaration submitted under Rule 2/

Rules 0& (5) (b)(c)& (2)& (0) and (6) are reproduced#$

4. Amendment of Declaration (sub section-2 of section

12).--

(5) The declaration submitted b a promoter

under rule 2 ma be amended at an time& b thepromoter& %f&$

(a) the declaration suffers from an clerical or

arithmetical mista"e or error arising therein from

an accidental slip or omissionI or

(b) the amendment is necessitated b reason of

an reision in the sanctioned plan of the buildingIor

(c) the proposed amendment is Fust and

reasonableI

proided that the amendment made b the

promoter shall not iolate the building be$

la!s& sanctioned building plan or the

contractual obligation of the promoter/


11/38

11

() ///////////////////////////////

(2) The Competent Authorit& on receipt of the

application under sub$rule () shall issue a !ritten

notice to the association of the apartment o!ners

of the building and shall also cause the publication

of a public notice in t!o dail ne!spapers

circulating in that localit/

(0)


12/38

12

Apartment Rules 455/ The Association is an Jaggrieed

personK as its rights has been affected b the .


13/38

13

.


14/38

14

J06/ Shri +/D/ ain& Sr/ AdocateI Shri .ain

Sinha& Sr/ Adocate and Shri Dunal Rai Singh

submits that on the enforcement of the 3/+/

Apartment Act& 454 on receiing the assent of

the Goernor on 5?/2/454 and its publication in

the 3/+/ Gazette on 51/2/454 proisions of the

Act came into force and could not hae a!aited

the notification of the Rules on 59/55/455 and

the odel ;e$>a!s b notification of the same

date on 59/55/455/ The Act is complete code in

itself/ The definition of competent authorit&

form of declaration& the amendment of

declaration& grant of permission for prosecution

and underta"ing to be filed b the personac'uiring apartment as !ell as model be$la!s

!ould not hae arrested the application of the

proisions of the Act/ The submit that as soon

as the building containing four or more

apartments or t!o or more building in an area

designated as bloc" each containing t!o ore

more apartments !ith total of four or more

apartments as defined in Section 2 (g) came into

e8istence and is occupied b the apartment

o!ners/ The proisions of the Act become

applicable to the building/ The declaration of

building and the deed of apartment under

Chapter does not depend upon the completion

certificate to be gien b the local authorit and

that as soon as such number of apartments

hae been handed oer to the o!ners& !hich is

necessar to form an association for 22L of the

apartments& !hicheer is more b !a of sale&

transfer or possession proided the building has

been completed along !ith all infrastructure

serices& the proisions of Chapter$%% proiding

for duties and liabilities of +romoters and

Chapter$%%% proiding for rights and obligations of


15/38

15

apartment o!ners become operatie/ The

declaration has to be submitted under Section

5 b the promoter in respect of a building as

defined in sub$section (2) (g) after the

commencement of the Act/ Section 52 proiding

for registration of deed of apartment after the

commencement of the Act is mandator to be

made under the proisions of the Registration

Act& 514?& !hich also proides for promoter or

apartment o!ner to enclose true cop of the

declaration made under Section 5 to such deed

of transfer/ The formation of a association is

mandator under sub$section () of Section 50

and is the Foint responsibilit of the promoterand the apartment o!ners !ith the obligation

upon the promoter to get the association

registered/

65. To sum up the conclusions dra!n b us are

as follo!s#$

(5) The 3/+/ Apartment Act& 454 and the 3/+/

Apartment Rules& 455 proides for a complete

code for regulating the rights& duties and

liabilities and for resoling the issues and

disputes bet!een the promoters and the

apartment o!ners/ The Act has oerriding effect

under Section 25 (5) oer all other la!s on the

subFect not!ithstanding anthing inconsistent

there!ith contained in an other la! for the

time being enforced/K

The Fudgment does not help the respondent$compan/

The Apartment Act& 454 operates in a restrictie field to

proide Jownership of an individual apartment in a

building of an undivided interest in the common areas

and facilities appurtenant to such apartment and to make


16/38

16

such apartment and interest heritable and transferable

and for matters connected therewith or incidental

thereto/K

The Apartment Act& 454 is confined to disputes

bet!een Apartment

iolation of common area or facilities in contraention of

sanctioned map/ Section 6 proides for offences Sub 5(b)

reproduced belo!#$

25. $ffe&es/ $$ (5) %f an promoter&

(a) M////////////////

(b) illegall ma"es construction in contraentionof the plan approed b the prescribedsanctioning authorit beond compoundablelimitsI

As stated earlier& the case at hand& is not a case

!here the deeloper has iolated the common area or

facilities under sanctioned plan7map& but it is a case of

iolation of ;uilding Regulations b .


17/38

17

either on its o!n motion or on application made

to it in this behalf& call for the records of an case

disposed of or order passed b the competent

authorit for the purpose of the satisfing itself as

to the legalit or propriet of an order passed or

direction issued and ma pass such order or issue

such direction in relation thereto as it ma thin"

fit#

The Supreme Court in Manohar Lal vs. 4rasen

an+ others ($&1 11 %CC ""! has considered the

scope of Section 05(2) of the 3/+/ 3rban =eelopment Act&

51:2/ +aras 29 and 2: are reproduced#$

29/) Sub$section (5) thereof empo!ers the State

Goernment to issue general directions !hich are

necessar to properl enforce the proisions of the

Act/ Sub$Section (2) thereof ma"e it crstal clear

that the State Goernment is a reisional authorit/

Therefore& the scheme of the Act ma"es it clear

that if a person is aggrieed b an order of the

authorit& he can prefer an appeal before the

Appellate Authorit i/e/ =iisional Commissioner

and the person aggrieed of that order ma file a

reision Application before the State Goernment/

Ho!eer& the State Goernment cannot pass an

order !ithout giing opportunit of hearing to the

person& !ho ma be adersel affected/

2:/ %n the instant case& it is the reisional

authorit !hich has issued direction to G=A to

ma"e allotment in faour of both the parties/


18/38

18

indiidual/ The State Goernment can ta"e onl

polic decisions as to ho! the statutor proisions

!ould be enforced but cannot deal !ith an

indiidual application/ The reisional authorit can

e8ercise its Furisdiction proided there is an order

passed b the lo!er authorit under the Act as it

can e8amine onl legalit or propriet of the order

passed or direction issued b the authorit therein/

%n ie! thereof& !e are of the considered opinion

that there !as no occasion for the State

Goernment to entertain the applications of the

said parties for allotment of land directl and issue

directions to G=A for allotment of land in their

faour/

%n the facts of this case& the .


19/38

19

reFected/ +lea of alternatie remed cannot become the

dumping ground of legitimate legal grieance of the

Apartment

deeloper for iolations of ;uilding Regulations in

collusion !ith the .


20/38

20

.


21/38

21

comprising of To!ers 59 5: (A+E, CE-A.E)/ The

laout plan for construction of A+E, CE-A.E (phase$)

!as sanctioned on 9/55/441& that is& before the

enactment of the 3/+/ Apartment Act& 454 and ;uilding

Regulations& 454 respectiel& therefore& according to

them& the proisions of the said Act and ;uildingRegulations !ould not appl to the respondents/ ; the

last sanction dated /2/45& !hen both the Apartment

Act 454 and ;uilding Regulations 454 !as in force& onl

the heights has been raised to 04 stories (55 mtrs) b

purchasing additional Bloor Area Ratio (BAR)/ %t is further

stated that the possession of flats and amenities of

phase$% has been handed oer to the residents !a bac"

in April& 44? and latest b September& 441& that is& the

flats hae been sold before coming into force of the Act/

According to the respondent$compan the A+E,

CE-A.E (phase$) are entirel separate proFects haing

separate facilities and separate entr and e8it gates&

therefore& the petitioners* societ Emerald Court (phase$

5) has& no locus nor an concern !ith the to!ers A+E,

CE-A.E (To!er 5: and 59)/

The .


22/38

22

thereunder has to be complied !ith/ The .


23/38

23

5ovt. of NC; of Delhi ($&&


24/38

24

N449 (6) SCC :4O !hich considered the 'uestion of

grant of li'uor ent licences/ The Supreme Court held that

!here applications re'uired processing and erification

the polic !hich should be applicable is the one !hich is

prealent on the date of grant and not the one !hich !as

prealent !hen the application !as filed/ The Ape8 Courtclarified that the e8ception to the said rule is !here a

right had alread accrued or ested in the applicant&

before the change of polic/

The map sanctioned in the ear 446 !as amended

and reised b the respondent$compan time to time

under subse'uent building regulations/ %t !as in the

fourth and final sanction dated 4/42/45& ma8imum

permissible BAR /:6 !as purchased/ The compan could

hae purchased the aforementioned ma8imum BAR /:6

in 441 !hen building regulations 449 !as amended in

441/ The compan chose to purchase BAR /:6 in 455&

!hen building regulations 449 !as superseded bbuilding regulations 454 and Apartment Act& 454 !as

enforced/ The map !as sanctioned as per ;uilding

Regulation 454/ The respondent$compan neer

'uestioned the condition regarding the application of

Apartment Act& 454/ The stand of the respondent$

compan that the proFect is in t!o phases is also not

borne out from the record& as .


25/38

25

proFect in t!o phases/ The maps submitted and

sanctioned is for a single proFect on the entire site/

%n order to appreciate the arguments adanced b

the parties/ %t is essential to e8amine the Act as !ell as

the building regulations framed thereunder/

The State legislature enacted the 3ttar +radesh

%ndustrial Area =eelopment Act& 51:9/ The Act proided

for the constitution of an authorit for the deelopment of

certain area in the State into %ndustrial 3rban To!nship

and for matters connected there!ith/

3nder Section 2 of the Act& the State Goernment

ma b notification constitute for the purpose of the Act

an Authorit/ The Authorit shall be a bod corporate/ The

State Goernment under Section 0 is re'uired to appoint

a Chief E8ecutie


26/38

26

Section 1 proides for ban on erection of buildings in

contraention of regulations/ Sub$clause 5 categoricall

states that no person shall erect or occup the building in

the industrial deelopment area in contraention of an

building regulations made under Sub$section / Sub$

clause proides that the authorit ma b notification!ith prior approal of the State Goernment ma"e

regulations to regulate the erection of buildings and such

regulations made proide for on or an of the matters

contained in Sub$clause A to %/ Sub$clause ; pertains to

laout plan of building !hether industrial& commercial or

residential and Sub$clause E is !ith regard to number of

heights of stories of buildings/

The Authorit !ith the prior approal of the State

Goernment and in e8ercise of its po!ers under sub$

section of Section 1 of the =eelopment Act& 51:9

enacted the .e!


27/38

27

height of the tallest building.

%%/) ;uilding Regulation 454#$

Regulation 0//5(9)

Distance between two adjacent building

blocks shall be minimum 6 mtrs. to 16 mtrs.depending on the height of blocks. or building

height up to 1! mtrs." the spacing shall be 6 mtrs.

#nd thereafter the spacing shall be increased b$

1 mtrs. or ever$ addition of % mtrs. &n height of

buildings subject to a ma'imum!% spacing of

16 mtrs. #s per *ational +uilding ,ode" -/. &f

the blocks have dead0end sides facing each other"

than the spacing shall be ma'imum mtrs.

&nstead of 16 mtrs. oreover the allottee ma$

provide or propose more than 16 meters space

between two blocks.

%%%/) .ational ;uilding Code&446#$

!.-.%.1 or buildings of height above 1 m"

the open sapces (side and rear) shall be as given

in 2able -. 2he front open spaces for increasing

heights of buildings shall be govered b$ ..1 (a).

;able $ %i+e an+ ear 7'en %'aces for Different

=ei4hts of Buil+in4s

(Clause ).$.8.1#

3l. 4eight of +uilding

(meters)

3ide and 5ear pen 3paces to be 7eft #round+uilding

(meters)

i. 1 %

ii. 1/ /

&ii. 1! 6

iv. -1 8


28/38

28

v. - !

vi. -8

9ii % 1

9iii %/ 11

&' 1-

: / 1%

:i / 1

:ii // and above 16

The respondent$compan has purchased the

additional BAR in 455 and the sanction of the map&

accordingl is in 45/ The sanction has to be as per the

;uilding Regulations applicable on the date of sanction/

Admittedl& the distance bet!een the building bloc"s has

been iolated b seen metres/

.ot onl this& the respondent$compan has also

iolated the clear space of :/6 mtrs after proiding for

surface par"ing/ The respondent$compan in para 2: of

their counter affidait has stated thatJ2hat the contents

of para 1/ of the ;rit


29/38

29

eident& on admitted facts& that the respondent compan

in collusion !ith the .


30/38

30

buildings# Eer building aboe 56 meters of height

!hether e8isting or to be erected shall submit plan and

obtain permission from entit authorized b the State

Goernment that safet from fire is reasonabl attainable

in practical and can be achieed/

%n e8ercise of its po!er under Section 5: of the Bire

Safet Act& 446& the State Goernment framed the 3ttar

+radesh Bire +reention and Bire Safet Rules 446/ Rule 0

of the Rules proides the minimum standards for fire

preention and fire safet measures specified for building

or premises shall be such as are proided in the building

be$la!s and .ational ;uilding Code of %ndia or an other

la! for the time being in force as amended from time to

time/ Rule !as notified on 5?/9/446 and Act came into

force on 0thanuar& 446/

Brom the aforementioned proisions& it is clear that

both the respondents are bound to compl !ith the

proisions of the Bire Safet Act& 446 and the rules

framed thereunder !hich !as enforced !a bac" in the

ear 446/ The distance bet!een building bloc"s as !ell

as clear space of :/6 mtrs for fire tenders is mandator&

!hich admittedl& has been iolated !hile sanctioning the

map in the ear 45/ The respondent compan !as put

to notice under the Act for iolation of distance and

space/

>earned counsel for the respondent$compan finall

made an attempt to argue that the phrase Jbuilding

bloc"sK is not defined under the be$la!s and according

to the learned Senior Adocate building bloc"s !ould

mean the entire building on plot no/ 0 of Sector 12$A


31/38

31

.


32/38

32

of common man is to hae a shelter of his o!n/


33/38

33

9eve#o'"et Co""ittee v. (tate of $rissa ad

$t*ers (440) ? SCC :22I Ro+a# Paradise 3ote# P


34/38

34

J%n all deeloped and deeloping countries thereis emphasis on planned deelopment of cities!hich is sought to be achieed b zoning&planning and regulating building constructionactiit/ Such planning& though highl comple8& isa matter based on scientific research& stud ande8perience leading to rationalization of la!s b!a of legislatie enactments and rules andregulations framed thereunder/ Poning and

planning do result in hardship to indiidualpropert o!ners as their freedom to use theirpropert in the !a the li"e& is subFected toregulation and control/ The priate o!ners are tosome e8tent preented from ma"ing the mostprofitable use of their propert/ ;ut for this reasonalone the controlling regulations cannot betermed as arbitrar or unreasonable/ The priateinterest stands subordinated to the public good/ %tcan be stated in a !a that po!er to plandeelopment of cit and to regulate the building

actiit therein flo!s from the police po!er of thestate/ The e8ercise of such goernmental po!er isFustified on account of its being reasonablnecessar for the public health& safet& morals orgeneral !elfare and ecological considerationsIthough an unnecessar or unreasonable inter$meddling !ith the priate o!nership of thepropert ma not be Fustified/

The municipal la!s regulating the buildingconstruction actiit ma proide for regulationsas to floor area& the number of floors& the e8tentof height rise and the nature of use to !hich abuilt$up propert ma be subFected in anparticular area/ The indiiduals as properto!ners hae to pa some price for securingpeace& good order& dignit& protection and comfortand safet of the communit/ .ot onl filth& stench

and unhealth places hae to be eliminated& butthe laout helps in achieing famil alues& outhalues& seclusion and clean air to ma"e thelocalit a better place to lie/ ;uilding regulationsalso help in reduction or elimination of firehazards& the aoidance of traffic dangers and thelessening of preention of traffic congestion in thestreets and roads/ Poning and building regulationsare also legitimized from the point of ie! of thecontrol of communit deelopment& thepreention of oer$cro!ding of land& the furnishing

of recreational facilities li"e par"s andplagrounds and the aailabilit of ade'uate!ater& se!erage and other goernmental or utilit


35/38

35

serices/

Structural and lot$area regulations authorize themunicipal authorities to regulate and restrict theheight& number of stories and other structuresIthe percentage of a plot that ma be occupiedIthe size of ards& courts& and open spacesI the

densit of populationI and the location and use ofbuildings and structures/ All these hae in ie!and do achiee the larger purpose of the publichealth& safet or general !elfare/ So are frontsetbac" proisions& aerage alignments andstructural alterations/ An iolation of zoning andregulation la!s ta"es the toll in terms of public!elfare and conenience being sacrificed apartfrom the ris"& inconenience and hardship !hichis posed to the occupants of the building/

What needs to be emphasized is that illegal and

unauthorized constructions of buildings and other

structure not onl iolate the municipal la!s and the

concept of planned deelopment of the particular area

but also affect arious fundamental and constitutional

rights of other persons/ The common man feels cheated

!hen he finds that illegal and unauthorized constructions

are supported b the people entrusted !ith the dut of

preparing and e8ecuting master plan and zonal plan as

!ell as building regulations/ The failure of the State

apparatus to ta"e prompt action to demolish such illegal

constructions has coninced the citizens that planningla!s are enforced onl against poor and all compromises

are made b the State machiner including the

deelopment authorit !hen it is re'uired to deal !ith

those !ho hae mone po!er or unhol ne8us to the

po!er corridors/

%n 9i'a u"ar u*er>eecase (supra)& the Ape8

Court held that there should be no Fudicial tolerance of


36/38

36

illegal and unauthorized constructions b those !ho treat

the la! to be their sub$serient and those indulging in

such actiities !ill not be spared/ (Refer avin+ra

Mutne>a, a>en+ra vs. Bha?an Cor'oration

0artnershi', $&&8("# Bo2 C


37/38

37

The respondent$compan has pleaded falsel and

destroed facts to non$suit the petitioner and mislead the

Court/ The then official of .


38/38

38

i/) The respondent$compan shall refund the

consideration receied from the priate parties& !ho hae

boo"ed apartments in Ape8 Ceane (T 59 and 5:) along

!ith 50L interest compounded annuall !ithin four

months from the date of filing of certified cop of this

order/

SubFect to the aboe& the !rit petition stands

a##o%ed/

.o order as to costs/

$rder 9ate :- 55/40/450

S/ +ra"ash

(Suneet Dumar& /) (/D/ Shu"la&/)

high court judgement in april 2014 on supertech

Documents

rit order

deeloped b respondent

e ueet uar7

thee8penses of respondent

direction directingrespondents

rit petition thepetitioner

beenadopted b

proisions of theapartment