Yash Developers vs Harihar Krupa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(SC) 614

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ARAVIND KUMAR
Yash Developers – Appellant
Versus
Harihar Krupa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Vikas Mehta, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Rajeev Maheshwaranand Roy, AOR Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Satyajeet Kharde, Adv. Mr. Sunny Jadhav, Adv. Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma, AOR Mr. Aniruddha Joshi, Adv. Mr. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, AOR Mr. Pradnya S. Adgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Ms. Rukmini Bobde, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Ms. Soumya Priyadarshinee, Adv. Mr. Amit Srivastava, Adv. Mr. Amlaan Kumar, Adv. Mr. P. N. Puri, AOR Mr. C.A. Sunderam, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aman Vachher, Adv. Mr. Yadunath Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Dhiraj, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Dubey, Adv. Mrs. Anshu Vachher, Adv. Ms. Abhiti Vachher, Adv. Mr. Akshat Vachher, Adv. Ms. Nandni Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Jasvinder Chaudhary, Adv. Mr. Ashwin Sawlani, Adv. Mr. Anil Nag, AOR Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Ms. Anshula Vijay Kumar Grover, AOR Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR

JUDGMENT :

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.

Table of Contents

I. Introduction :

II. Scope of Judicial Review against an order under Section 13 of the Act:

III. Accountability of officers exercising power coupled with duty under Section 13

IV. Submissions and Analysis

(i) The first phase of delay is between 2003 and 2011

(ii) The second phase relates to the delay in obtaining necessary permissions, approvals and environmental clearances from 2011 to 2014

(iii) The third phase of delay relates to the alleged non-cooperation of certain slum dwellers leading to the stalling of the project from 2014 to 2019

(iv) The next period of inaction is from 2015 to 2017. This is sought to be justified on the ground that the Municipal Corporation sanctioned a road that may pass through the property and published the draft development plan (DP) on 25.02.2015.

(v) Re: Appellant did not have the financial resources

(vi) Re: Submission on maintainability of proceedings before AGRC.

(vii) Re: Locus or conflict of respondent no.6.

V. Findings

VI. Conclusion

VII. Re : Performance audit of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(SC) 614

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ARAVIND KUMARYash Developers – AppellantVersusHarihar Krupa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent

Cases Referred (8)

PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, ARAVIND KUMAR
Yash Developers – Appellant
Versus
Harihar Krupa Co-Operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent