IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, KUNAL RAVI SINGH, JJ.
Jakson Engineers Limited - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and others - Respondent
WRIT - C No. - 29625 of 2025
Decided On : 11-11-2025
JUDGMENT :
(Per: Kunal Ravi Singh, J.)
[1] Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ankit Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel Sri Devesh Vikram for the State-respondent and Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority.
[2] The present petition has been filed against the letter dated 10.07.2025, whereby the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as GNIDA) i.e. respondent no.2 had demanded default amount of lease rent as on 10.04.2025 at Rs.2,08,40,858/-. Further prayer has been made to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue permission to mortgage forthwith.
FACTS:-
[3] In brief, facts leading to the present petition are that the petitioner i.e. M/s Jakson Engineers Ltd., with an objection of expanding its industrial operations, applied for allotment of an industrial plot under the Scheme floated by respondent no.2. In light of the application, the petitioner was allotted plot nos.25 & 26, Ecotech-III, Udyog Kendra, Greater Noida. Thereafter, consequent to the allotment, lease deed dated 06.01.2006 was executed between the petitioner and respondent no.2 and possession memo was also given to the petitioner on 06.01.2006. The terms and conditions of the lease deed required the petitioner to pay an annual rent of lease of Rs.13,50,360/- for the first ten years and thereafter lease rent may be enhanced after every ten years from the date of execution of the lease deed by paying an amount not exceeding 50% of the annual lease rent payable at the time of such enhancement. The annual lease rent was to be deposited by 6th day of January every year. The lease deed also provided that in the event of default of payment of lease rent, interest @ 17% per annum compounding every half yearly would be chargeable for the delayed period.
[4] Before the execution of the lease deed on 06.01.2006, the respondent no.3 in the year 2005, demanded an annual lease rent of Rs.13,50,360/- by letter dated 22.12.2005 which was deposited by the petitioner on 28.12.2005. Thereafter, the respondent no.2 further demanded Rs.2,47,37,826/- towards one time premium of the leased plot. The said amount was deposited by the petitioner in its entirety on 07.12.2006. This payment constituted 50% of the premium as the balance 50% had already been paid by the petitioner at the time of execution of the lease deed. The petitioner, thereafter towards payment of annual lease rent for the year 2007, instead of depositing the annual lease rent of Rs.13,50,360/-, deposited one time lease rent equivalent to 11 instalments i.e. an amount of Rs.1,48,53,960/- which was received by the Authority on 08.01.2007. After deposit of the one time lease rent equivalent to 11 instalments, the petitioner requested for issuance of “No Dues Certificate” by means of letter dated 28.04.2009. Thereafter, in pursuance of a letter dated 23.07.2010, the respondent no.3 by means of letter dated 27.07.2010 intimated the petitioner that no premium/lease rent is due against the petitioner. Accordingly, on 27.07.2010, No Dues Certificate was issued by the respondent no.2 in favour of the petitioner.
[5]. In the year 2020, the petitioner again requested for No Dues Certificate for the leased plot from respondent no.2 vide letter dated 04.07.2020 in order to seek permission to mortgage from respondent no.2.
[6] In light of the online application dated 04.07.2020 moved by the petitioner, respondent no.2 issued a letter on 31.07.2020 clearly stating that with regard to the leased plot nos.25 & 26, Ecotech-III, Udyog Kendra, Greater Noida, no premium and lease rent is pending as per the records available with the Authority. Thereafter, on 14.02.2024, permission to mortgage was issued in favour of the petitioner by respondent no.2. The petitioner again applied for permission to mortgage on 08.10.2024. H
A party cannot seek relief while simultaneously disobeying court orders, and the government has the authority to fix lease amounts based on prevailing market values.
Unilateral retrospective enhancement of lease rent by an authority, without executing a supplementary deed, is illegal, and higher authority’s orders must be implemented by lower bodies.
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....
The authority has the power to terminate a lease in case of breach, and a notice must be served before termination.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's discretion to grant a decree under Order XII Rule 6 of CPC based on clear admissions in the pleadings and reply notice, especially when....
Claims for land lease rights can be barred by delay, especially when previous agreements are accepted without protest.
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.