IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SUVRA GHOSH, J.
Excellent IT Services Pvt. Ltd. and Another – Petitioners
Versus
K.M.D.A. and Others – Respondents
WPA No. 18294 of 2022
Decided On : 18-04-2024
Extension of Time - Construction - Clause 4(iii) of the licence dated 12th March, 2008 - [Clause 4(iii)] - [Kolkata Municipal Development Authority Act, 2007, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services Act, 2010, Building Rules of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation] - The court discussed the interpretation of clause 4(iii) of the licence deed, the authority's power to extend time for construction, and the application of the doctrine of proportionality. The court highlighted the need for the authority to consider the petitioners' request for extension of time and the arbitrary nature of the termination of the lease by the KMDA.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought an extension of time for construction as per clause 4(iii) of the licence dated 12th March, 2008. The KMDA cancelled the allotment due to the petitioners' failure to commence construction within the stipulated time.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the cancellation of the allotment by the KMDA to be arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioners' request for extension of time for construction.
Issues: The issues involved the interpretation of clause 4(iii) of the licence deed, the authority's power to extend time for construction, and the maintainability of the writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the authority should have considered the petitioners' request for extension of time and that the termination of the lease by the KMDA was arbitrary and unreasonable. It emphasized the need for the authority to act in accordance with the doctrine of proportionality.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned decision was set aside, and the respondents were directed to reconsider the petitioners' request for extension of time for construction.
JUDGMENT :
SUVRA GHOSH, J.
1. The petitioners have primarily prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant extension of time for construction in terms of clause 4(iii) of the licence dated 12th March, 2008, by recalling the impugned decision communicated to the petitioners by the memo dated 12th July, 2022.
2. The first petitioner was formerly known as M/s. Bajoria Holding Private Limited which was changed to M/s. Excellent I. T. Services Private Limited with effect from 26th July, 2022. The first petitioner was allotted land measuring more or less 23.54 cottahs in plot no. IND/3B/6 sector - J at EKADP, Zone 1 @ Rs. 10 lakhs per cottah aggregating to total sum of Rs. 2,35,40,000/- for the purpose of developing Outsource Management Hub vide letter of allotment issued by the Kolkata Municipal Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the KMDA) on 23rd October, 2007. Possession of the land was handed over to the petitioners on 4th February, 2008 and deed of licence executed by and between the first petitioner and the KMDA on 12th March, 2008 upon payment of the entire consideration amount by the first petitioner. The petitioners approached the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (in short the KMC) for mutation of the said land, appointed a surveyor to undertake survey of the land, appointed architects for architectural, interior and landscape services in relation to the proposed construction and also obtained electricity connection upon payment of requisite charges. Upon the property being mutated in favour of the first petitioner, the petitioners have been paying all applicable taxes in respect of the property till date. Provisional no objection certificate for the proposed construction was granted by the Director General, West Bengal Fire and Emergency Services on 15th September, 2010. The building plan was recommended for sanction by the KMC by its resolution taken in a meeting held on 15th December, 2010.
3. In terms of clause 4 (iii) of the deed, the petitioners were to start construction within 24 months from the date of issuance of allotment letter or within such further time as allowed by the authority in writing on sufficient and reasonable grounds, in accordance with plans, sanctions and specifications approved by the appropriate authorities on payment of such fees as required, in accordance with the building rules of the KMC and upon compliance of other statutory rules and regulations framed for the purpose. The petitioners were supposed to complete the construction work within 36 months from the date of issuance of the allotment letter. The petitioners were unable to abide by the said clause due to delay caused by various State authorities to grant the necessary clearances for the construction work to proceed and applied before the KMDA for extension of time to commence and complete the work. The KMDA, by a letter issued on 21st February, 2011, cancelled the allotment/licence deed and withdrew possession of the land delivered in favour of the first petitioner. The cancellation order was challenged by the petitioners in an earlier writ petition being W.P. No. 5324 (W) of 2011 and by a judgment delivered on 25th September, 2020, a coordinate Bench of this Court directed the KMDA to examine on merits the ground realities qua the construction as on 24th November, 2009 and take an independent decision thereafter. Pursuant thereto, notice of hearing was served upon the first petitioner by the KMDA and upon hearing the petitioner, the committee of the KMDA decided to place the matter before the next authority meeting of the KMDA for taking a decision. The petitioners were communicated vide letter issued on 12th July, 2022 that the matter was placed in the authority meeting and the authority decided that the allotment stood cancelled.
4. Policy decision was taken by the KMDA in the meeting of the Pricing Committee held on 12th February, 2009 that where construction could not be started
Kisand Sahkari Chini Mills Limited and Others vs. Vardan Linkers and Others
Madras Aluminium Company Limited vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and Another
Maria Margarida Sequeira Fernandes and Others vs. Erasmo Jack De Sequeira
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the authority to consider extension requests in accordance with the terms of the licence deed and the application of the doctri....
The judgment established that the discretionary jurisdiction of the court may not be exercised in favor of those who approach the court after a long time, and that suppression of material facts by a ....
Penalty for construction delay under lease quashed due to delays from court stay, statutory approvals, additional area; writ maintainable for arbitrary state action; 6-year extension non-discriminato....
Supplementary lease deeming additional built-up area integral with no time limit overrides original four-year completion clause for composite construction; penalty demands arbitrary, illegal; payment....
Imposing penal charges for contract breaches is valid when stipulated policies and terms align with contractual obligations, and acceptance of penalties post-acceptance negates protest claims.
Additional premium demand for construction delay under lease held arbitrary where caused by statutory approvals, late commencement certificates, and extra built-up area without timeline; applicable s....
Lease penalty for construction delay invalid where lessor nondiscloses material site defects, supplementary deed removes time limit for additional built-up area, delays due to approvals/statutory fac....
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.