VINEY MITTAL, H.S.BHALLA
Ganpati Shopping Mall Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
Viney Mittal, J. - The petitioner-Company has approached this Court for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue a Zoning Plan mentioning the Floor Area Ratio (hereinafter referred to as the "FAR") as 150% instead of 125% as detailed in the Zoning Plan, Annexure P-5. Further directions have been sought against the respondents to issue an amended allotment letter/re-allotment letter after mentioning the rate of interest at 11% and 14% (at item Nos. 1 and 18 thereof), as per terms and conditions of the advertisement dated April 22, 2004, instead of 15% and 18%, as mentioned in the allotment letter/re-allotment letter. The petitioner-Company has also sought directions against the respondents to receive the balance amount from the petitioner within 60 days from the date of issue of the correct Zoning Plan.
2. A advertisement dated April 22, 2004 was issued by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short "HUDA"), respondent No. 2, in all the leading newspapers i.e. The Tribune, Indian Express, Bhaskar, Punjab Kesri, Hindustan Times and Times of India. The aforesaid half page advertisement dwelled upon auction of free hold Shopping Malls and Mult
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.