Back
2023 Supreme(Bom) 1048
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.V.Gangapurwala, Sandeep V.Marne, JJ.
Kamlakar Motiram Satve – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Interim Application No. 10155 of 2022
Decided On : 11-01-2023
Milind Sathe, Advocate, Chetan Kapadia, Advocate, Vidisha Rohira, Advocate, Parag Kabadi, Advocate, Falguni Thakkar, Advocate, P.P.Kakade, Advocate, M.M.Pabale, Advocate, Akshay Shinde, Advocate, Mihir Joshi, Advocate, Latika Kabad, Advocate, Rohit Joshi, Advocate
The court justified the delay in construction due to environmental clearances and other regulatory requirements, and granted the developers' prayers for extension of timelines and condonation of delay.
Headnote:
Public Interest Litigations - Development of Powai Area - Tripartite Agreement - [Environment Clearance, Construction Obligations, Possession Receipt] - The court directed the developers to complete construction of specific flats and hand over a percentage of the total FSI to the State Government. The developers sought condonation of delay in construction, which was granted by the court. The court found that the developers had fulfilled their obligations but had defaulted in meeting the timeline for construction of some flats. The court justified the delay in construction due to environmental clearances and other regulatory requirements. The court allowed the developers' prayers for extension of timelines and condonation of delay. The court also permitted the withdrawal of sale proceeds deposited as per the interim order. The court discharged the committee appointed for the matter and disposed of the PILs and related applications.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the development of vast lands at Powai in Mumbai known as 'Powai Area Development Scheme' (PADS). The constructions put up by the developer on these lands under PADS were challenged in three Public Interest Litigations, seeking an inquiry into the Tripartite Agreement executed between the State of Maharashtra, Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA), and the developers. The court passed extensive interim orders directing the developers to complete construction of specific flats and hand over a percentage of the total FSI to the State Government.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the developers had fulfilled their obligations but had defaulted in meeting the timeline for construction of some flats. The court justified the delay in construction due to environmental clearances and other regulatory requirements. The court allowed the developers' prayers for extension of timelines and condonation of delay. The court also permitted the withdrawal of sale proceeds deposited as per the interim order. The court discharged the committee appointed for the matter and disposed of the PILs and related applications.
Issues: The main issue involved in the PILs was the violation of the Tripartite Agreement by the developers. The court had already dealt with this issue in the interim order and directed corrective measures to be undertaken. The developers sought condonation of delay in construction, which was the primary issue before the court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in construction of some flats was justified due to environmental clearances and other regulatory requirements. The court granted the developers' prayers for extension of timelines and condonation of delay based on the justifications provided. The court also permitted the withdrawal of sale proceeds deposited as per the interim order and discharged the committee appointed for the matter.
Final Decision: The court allowed the developers' prayers for extension of timelines and condonation of delay, finding that the developers had fulfilled their obligations. The court also permitted the withdrawal of sale proceeds deposited as per the interim order and discharged the committee appointed for the matter. The court disposed of the PILs and related applications.
JUDGMENT
SANDEEP V.MARNE,J. - These three Public Interest Litigations involve the issue of development of vast lands at Powai in Mumbai known as "Powai Area Development Scheme" (for short PADS). The constructions put up by the developer on these lands under PADS have been challenged in these three Public Interest Litigations praying inter alia for institution of inquiry in respect of Tripartite Agreement dtd. 19/11/1986 executed between State of Maharashtra, Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and the developers.
2. Extensive interim order dtd. 22/2/2012 came to be passed in the present Public Interest Litigations holding that there was breach and non-compliance of the Tripartite Agreement by the developers. This court therefore proceeded to pass the following directions:
(a) The petitioners and the developer as also the Metropolitan Commissioner of the MMRDA shall prepare a statement of all the buildings and structures put up by the developer in the Powai ADS alongside their names and description and the numbers and area of the units/flats therein within 4 weeks from today.
(b) The petitioners, the developer and the Metropolitan Commissioner of the MMRDA shall prepare a plan showing the vacant areas of the plot under the Powai ADS, where further buildings may be constructed, within 4 weeks from today.
(c) If the parties are unable to work jointly they would be entitled to work individually in terms of (a) and (b) above.
(d) The developer shall not put up any further construction of whatsoever nature on the remainder of the plot under the Powai ADS before specifying the vacant lands and the buildings that can be constructed thereupon as per the statement and plan mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) above and shown to Court.
(e) The developer shall be entitled to commence any further construction only after obtaining the specific permission of this Court in that behalf and subject to the sanctioned plans of the MMC.
(f) Such construction shall be only of 1511 flats of 40 sq.mtrs 1593 flats of 80 sq.mtrs without any amalgamation, exception, or further allowance.
(g) No two flats shall be sold to the same person or any member of her/his family, being her/his spouse and children.
(h) The developer shall sell to the State Government from such construction such of the flats or units as would represent 15% of the total FSI of the total plot consumed under the development @ Rs.135.00 per sq.ft. And the State Government shall offer those flats to be purchased by the employees of the State Government at the aforesaid rate in a transparent manner.
(i) After constructing and showing the Court the total number of units or flats constructed for residential purpose as initially required under the Powai ADS and after offering to sell the flats as directed in clause (h) above, the developer shall submit a report of such construction and sale to Court with a copy to the Petitioners in all the above Petitions, the MMRDA, the State Government and the MMC.
(j) The Developer shall thereafter be entitled to put any further construction as per law.
(k) The compensation for the breaches of the tripartite agreement claimed by the MMRDA shall be determined in the appropriate forum.
(l) The petitioners may file any private criminal complaint for any offence committed by the developer or any of the public officers of MMRDA or the State Government in the appropriate Court.
(m) All the writ petitions shall stand over to 29/3/2012 for placing on record the statement and plan as directed in clauses (a) and (b).
3. Thus under the interim order dtd. 22/2/2012, this court directed the developers/applicants to complete construction of 1511 flats of 40 sq.mtrs, 1593 flats of 80 sq.mtrs and to sell to the State Government such of the flats or units as would represent 15% of the total FSI of the total plot consumed under the development.
4. Further interim order came to be passed by this court on 3/10/2017 clarifying that the number of flats to be constructed by t
