AUTHOR
Aravind Prakash
He is currently pursuing B.COM LLB (Hons.) from School of Legal Studies, Cochin University of Science and Technology. He is a member of LJRF Ernakulam Chapter and also a student member of Project Complete Lawyer (LJRF).
INTRODUCTION
The Realty sector plays a vital part in the widening the infrastructure and economic development of India. Conversely, this industry faced many public condemnations with regard to the unfair trade and fraudulent practices adopted by the developers or builders since there was no proper legislations and rules to put an end to this situation. Many homebuyers were duped in multiple ways. So to mitigate this, various judicial pronouncements were made by the Indian courts. The Twin Tower Demolition Case1 is one such step made by the apex court to pacify and uplift the rights of homebuyers.
Facts and Procedural History
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter ‘NOIDA’) allotted 11.92 acres of land to Supertech Limited (Appellant) for the development of a housing society called the Emerald Court. On 20 June 2005, NOIDA approved the site plan for the erection of Emerald Court consisting of fourteen independent towers. Facilitating the said construction, a supplementary lease deed was executed by NOIDA favouring the Supertech Limited. Under the said deed, the total land area of the project was extended to 1.4 acres. With this extension the plan was also revised by the builders adding two new floors and a shopping complex. Further two revisions were done by the appellant in 2009 and 2012 by altering the height of the towers and started constructing the twin towers by intruding into the garden area and thereby obstructing the vision, air and sunshine of the residents. Aggrieved by the frequent revisions of the plan, a writ petition was filed by the Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare Association before the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad. They mainly resorted to the provisions of the UP Apartments Act 2010 which came into force on 19 March 2010 prior to the third revision whereby it mandates the consent of flat owners before the alteration of the sanctioned plan.2 The Allahabad High Court allowed the demolition of towers and directed for the prosecution of the officers in default who sanctioned the plan under section 49 of UP Urban Development Act, 1973. Dissatisfied by this judgment the Supertech Limited approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Issues
The issues involved in this case was threefold:-
- Whether twin towers violate the distance and height requirements mentioned under the New Okhla Industrial Development Area Building Regulations and Directions 2006?
- Whether the compliances required under the UP Apartments Act 2010 is duly met by the Supertech Limited?
- Whether the construction which was once sanctioned by the competent authority can be demolished by the Court?
Decision
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 31 August 2021ordered for the demolition of the twin towers to be executed within three months from the date of the judgment at the own expense of Supertech Limited. The top court also directed the Appellant to repay all the monies received from the flat purchasers of the twin towers with interest rate 12% p.a.(excluding their pending dues) and this shall be completed within a span of two months of this judgment. The compensation of 2 crores seeked by the Resident Welfare Association was also granted.
ANALYSIS
This case has been in the limelight since a gross amount of home buyers interest is involved. Correspondingly the apex court has dealt this legal battle with Supertech and Resident Welfare Association with utmost diligence. While delivering the judgment, the court had relied on various cases where similar incidents had occurred in the past. So, the Supreme Court noticed unregulated development substantially influences the right of enjoyment in property by people dwelling in residential areas, and the endorsement or approbation of such unapproved development by either courts or development/planning authorities would seriously affect the public interest at large.
CONCLUSION
This judgment will engrave their rights in letters of gold and ideally stop the fake acts of developers. The top court also highlighted the need for a rapport between buyer and developer. In this judgment, the Supreme Court has given a purposive approach of interpretation to the question of law in the enactments to guarantee that an ultimate intent behind the statute is given adequate impact. The observations made by the Supreme Court in this case will ingrain trust in homebuyers, and definitely go about as a solid obstruction to the two developers as well as planning authorities who participate in unjustifiable and degenerative practices that could encroach upon the rights and privileges of such homebuyers.
Endnotes
1. Supertech Limited V. Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare Association & Ors Civil Appeal No. 5041 of 2021 [Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11959 of 2014]
2. UP Apartments Act 2010, S. 4(4) and S.5
3. Editor, Sharma, D., Saba, Indulia, B., & Bhardwaj, P. (2021, September 3). Issue-wise analysis of why SC ordered demolition of illegal twin towers constructed by Supertech, prosecution of Noida and Supertech officials for collusion and possible statutory violations. SCC Blog. https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2021/09/01/demolition-of-illegal-twin-towers-constructed-by-supertech/.
