JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD
Ajar Enterprises Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Satyanarayan Somani – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.
Leave granted.
2. The appellant, Ajar Enterprises Private Limited ("Ajar") has called into question a judgment of a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, in its Bench at Indore, dated 8 February 2016. The High Court (i) set aside the renewal of a lease granted by Ujjain Development Authority ("UDA") to Ajar for the period from 21 December 2012 till 20 December 2042; (ii) directed that possession of the land in dispute be taken back; (iii) that in order to fetch the best price, the land be put to a public auction; and (iv) directed that the transfer fee which was charged to Ajar should be fixed on the basis of the guidelines for 2011-2012 and the differential be recovered with interest at eight percent per annum. These directions have been issued by the High Court while entertaining a petition filed in public interest by the first and second respondents.
3. UDA is a statutory body constituted under the Madhya Pradesh Town and Country Planning Act, 1973. On 16 July 1985, a deed of lease was executed by UDA of land admeasuring 43,407.00 square meters, situated at Sanwer Road and comprised in Nanakheda Scheme No. 23 at Ujjain in favour of a comp
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.