Latest news with #PankajBhatia
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
HC junks Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority order to cancel land for project
Noida: The Allahabad high court has quashed a 2022 decision by Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) to cancel land allotted to Royal Golf Link City Projects Pvt Ltd, calling the move "arbitrary and illegal". The court struck down restoration charges, time extension penalties, and penal interest imposed by GNIDA, asking the Authority to restore the plot and revalidate the project map. The court was hearing a petition filed by Royal Golf Link in April, challenging a UP govt order that restored the land allotment but levied several charges. On May 27, Justice Pankaj Bhatia of the Lucknow bench of the HC struck down the state govt's order, nullified the penalties, and granted a three-year extension to the developer to complete the project without extra cost. The court said GNIDA had no valid reason to deny relief to Royal Golf Link when similar reprieve was given to other developers. "Thus, for all the reasons above, the impugned order insofar as it denies the benefit of restoration charges, the extension of time without payment of charges, non-charge of penalty interest and zero period benefit is wholly unjustified and the order to that effect is bad in law. Thus, the writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondent no 3 (GNIDA) to recalculate the dues as indicated in the cancellation order dated July 20, 2022 without charging the restoration charges, grant the benefit of time extension without any charges and calculate the interest without charging any penal interest at the rate of SBI's MCLR + 1," the court order read. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo The case revolves around a 36.4-hectare land parcel allotted in 2014-15 for developing a recreational park in Sector 27. Initially allocated to a consortium led by Ultra Homes Construction (part of the Amrapali Group), the project was later transferred to Royal Golf Link City Projects, a special purpose vehicle. The total land premium was Rs 298 crore, of which Rs 59.6 crore was paid when the lease was signed. The dispute emerged when GNIDA failed to provide full physical possession of land, with 13,517sqm under encroachment, including a pond and connecting pathway. The situation was further complicated when the then DM asked the developer to leave this area for public access, necessitating a project redesign. The Authority also recorded the presence of farmers on a part of the land and deferred the next premium instalment by six months. The Amrapali case in the Supreme Court further complicated the progress, as the company declared an investment in Royal Golf Link in 2018. The SC ruled that leaseholder dues should be calculated at SBI's MCLR + 1. Royal Golf Link sought recalculation of dues and an 18-month zero-period benefit from the start govt, saying it hadn't received full possession. Instead, GNIDA cancelled the lease on July 20, 2022, citing unsettled dues of Rs 360 crore. The developer moved HC, claiming that GNIDA ignored the SC ruling on interest. Homebuyers also intervened, arguing that the additional charges would be passed on to them. They also claimed that most of the project was ready, but was stuck due to GNIDA's disputes. Royal Golf Link insisted that the restoration fees were unjust since the cancellation was ruled illegal. The court accepted the developer's request for zero-period relief, waiving penalty interest and dues for the Covid pandemic period and from July 20, 2022, to June 12, 2024. The court ruled that the developer must pay 25% of the revised amount — after adjusting Rs 5 crore already paid — within 60 days of receiving the demand. The project Royal Golf Link is building is known as 'The Hemisphere', which includes 1,300 flats, villas, and shops. The developer has claimed to have offered fit-out possession to around 900 buyers.
Hindustan Times
21-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Relief for litigants: HC stays ₹500 charge for photo identification
Providing relief to litigants, the Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court, as an interim measure, has directed that the charge of ₹500 for photo identification by Bar Associations is not to be realised from them. In another interim measure, the court further directed the registry to accept affidavits sworn before public notaries, holding them valid under the Notaries Act, 1952, saying no rule prohibits their acceptance. Justice Pankaj Bhatia passed the order on May 19 while hearing a petition filed by M/s Rajdhani Inter State Transport Co., New Delhi, through its authorised signatory Sunil Kumar Magoo, challenging the requirement of photo identification for filing petitions. The court said that in the era where efforts are being made to promote digital India, 'continuing with a regressive practice of the litigants travelling from far-off places solely for photo identification is, on the face of it, is retrogressive'. The court observed that the practice had led the High Court Bar Association and the Oudh Bar Association to charge amounts 'beyond the sanction of law, solely based upon resolutions.' It remarked that 'continuation of such a practice is neither desirable nor does it augur well for the temple of justice,' which must function with the support of Bar Associations to fulfil the constitutional goal of providing 'access to justice to all'. Earlier, the petitioner's counsel had sought an adjournment to file a supplementary affidavit, citing the deponent's inability to travel to Lucknow for photo identification. In response, the court questioned why the affidavit could not be sworn before a notary at the deponent's place of residence, as permitted under the Notaries Act, 1952. The petitioner's counsel explained that while there was no bar under the Act, the registry at the Allahabad high court typically accepts only affidavits sworn before oath commissioners appointed under Chapter IV of the Allahabad High Court Rules. Noting that prima facie an additional cost ( ₹400-500) being charged from the litigants, which is going to the lawyers from the photo affidavit centre, was not sanctioned by law, the court had appointed advocate Tushar Mittal as amicus curiae to assist the court on the said issue. The court, however, said that the Bar Associations were at liberty to take measures for the welfare of lawyers, but no such amount could be charged in connection with the filings made before the high court. Accordingly, the court disposed of the issue, however, it ordered the writ petition would continue on its merits.
