STOCK MARKET UPDATE

Ticker

6/recent/ticker-posts

Amrapali Group case] SC denies financial benefits to Promoters and Builders as they were not a party to the case at hand,

 Top 10 unusual laws from around the world | Veena World

The Supreme Court opined that the interim applications seeking a reduced rate of interest demanded by the Authorities when filed by the companies (Promoters/Builders) who are not even remotely connected with the case at hand are liable to be dismissed. The Court would not be bound to take cognizance of such interim applications.

In the present case, the interim applications were filed by builder groups and companies who were not even remotely connected with the plight of the homebuyers of the Amrapali Group whose case had come up before the Court for adjudication.Therefore, the applications were dismissed. 

Brief Facts: 

It was alleged that in 2011, Amrapali Group entered into real estate projects and proposed to construct flats. Various homebuyers booked apartments in 2010-2014 and payments were made. 

However, Amrapali Group failed to make the flats and allegedly money of the homebuyers was siphoned. The Court stepped in to protect the interest of homebuyers and directed vigil over the function of Amrapali Group. 


A builder named Ace group of Companies preferred an interim application asking for the benefit of a reduction in the rate of interest that is to be charged by the Authority. The said builder approached the Court on its own behalf, had no authorization from the builders who entered into lease deeds with the authorities, did not even have power of attorney on behalf of others and was not even authorized by other developers. 

Further, due to the pandemic, directions were issued by Uttar Pradesh State to reduce the rate of interest that is charged by the authorities which applied to all the builders. 

Many other groups of companies objected to the orders of the Court passed and it was demanded that the relief be extended to other Promoters/ developers other than Amrapali Group. The court issued orders in this respect. 

 

These orders were then objected to by the Authorities and hence, they were recalled.  

Therefore, the present interim applications have been filed alleging that once orders were passed after considering everything, there was no reason to recall the orders. Further, that one such order was not recalled and if it was not recalled, the authorities are under obligation to charge interest in terms of that un-recalled order. 

Contentions of the Applicants: 

It has been contended that if the project run by Amrapali Group has been given financial benefit, others should also be given considering everyone suffered the crunch due to the pandemic. It was argued that recalling orders was not justified especially since there was no manifest apparent error or mistake in the orders. 

Contentions of the Respondents (Noida/ Greater Noida Authorities): 

It was argued that the Court took judicial notice/cognizance of the project of Amrapali Group and none of the other promoters/builders was remotely concerned either directly or indirectly with such project. 


Observations of the Court: 

It was observed that none of the group of companies was related to the functioning of the Amrapali Group. However, the Court did step into the interim application preferred by the Ace Group of Companies and other companies to revise the rate of interest. It was when the  Noida/ Greater Noida Authorities preferred an application, that the Court revisited the orders passed and recalled. 

It was held that there was no reason for the Court to set aside the recalling order. It was opined that the interim applications are filed by companies who are not even remotely connected with the plight of the homebuyers of the Amrapali Group. Therefore, there was no reason for taking cognizance. 


The decision of the Court:

Based on the aforementioned findings, the interim applications were dismissed. 

Case Title: Bikram Chatterji & Ors. V. Union of India & Ors. 

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi, Hon’ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi

Case No.:Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 940 of 2017

Citation: 2023 Latest Caselaw 155 SC

Advocates for Petitioners:Advs. Himanshu Shekar, Raj Kamal

Advocates for Respondent:Advs. Rakhi Ray, Vishnu Sharma, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Ruchira Goel Binay Kumar Das 



 

Social media is bold. 

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free. 

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant. 

Social media is you.

 (With input from news agency language) 

If you like this story, share it with a friend!   

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our

journalism free from government and corporate pressure .

 


Post a Comment

0 Comments

Custom Real-Time Chart Widget

'; (function() { var dsq = document.createElement('script'); dsq.type = 'text/javascript'; dsq.async = true; dsq.src = '//' + disqus_shortname + '.disqus.com/embed.js'; (document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0] || document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0]).appendChild(dsq); })();

market stocks NSC