real estate Tuesday’s major Supertech Ltd Supreme Court The Residents Welfare Association, the owner of the emerald court, who challenged the construction of the two 40-story towers, has terrorized the builders by making unjustified claims.
The Residents Welfare Association said Supertech has built a twin tower by ignoring building safety and distance standards and breaking into the garden area to block the resident’s view, air and sunlight.
Judge DY Chandrachud and Shah’s bench were told by Supertech’s senior lawyer, Bikas Singh, that they did not violate the norms claimed by the Residents’ Welfare Association in the construction of the Twin Towers. ..
The bench told Singh that what his client did was clearly wrong, as the tower was built by breaking into the green common area of the co-operative.
“The Residents’ Welfare Association is terrorizing builders by making unjustified claims,” Shin said.
A senior lawyer said Wednesday that he would discuss the benefits of the Residents Welfare Association and oppose the debate.
“They have raised new issues in the Supreme Court that were never discussed in the High Court. I want to put everything in the affidavit that I file on Wednesday morning before the court work begins,” he said. ..
Bench allowed Shin to submit an affidavit and posted the issue on Wednesday.
The Supreme Court hears Supertech’s appeal and other petitions filed by homebuyers in response to the 2014 order of the Allahabad High Court ordering the dismantling of the Twin Towers for violating the norms. doing.
At a hearing, supporter Gauraf Agrawar, who was appointed to Amicus Curiae in this case, said that while many homebuyers who booked an apartment in the new twin towers chose to wait. Said that the payment was refunded. He said that if the court upheld the existence of these twin towers, the court would have to investigate the problems faced by the residents of Tower 1 and Tower 2 of about 88 families living there.
Agrawar suggested that if the court upheld the order of the Prayagraj High Court to order the dismantling of both towers, it would have to be done by a specialized institution and many residential towers were in close proximity.
“People have to evacuate, as was done in the demolition of buildings in Maradu, Kerala, and then explosives can be used for demolition. All of these buildings connect to a common basement. Because of this, we cannot rule out the potential impact of controlled explosions on residential towers, “said Agrawar.
He further asked the contractor to pay double compensation to Tower 1 and Tower 2 residents if the court found that the twin buildings violated the norm, allowing them to purchase. I suggested to do it. Flat near the same area.
Bench said he couldn’t force homebuyers who said Amikas had to get consent.
He said the court must take a considerable view, balancing the rights of 88 families with the rights of more than 300 families living in other residential towers of the Emerald Court project.
Advocate Ravindra Kumar, who appeared at NOIDA authorities, said the sanctions imposed on the building plan had no problems and did not violate the norms at all.
“As an authority, I have no knowledge or expectations of the transaction between the homebuyer and the builder, and what is shown in the project pamphlet,” he said. ..
Kumar said it was very easy to level allegations against public authorities, but difficult to prove.
Initially, senior advocate Jayant Boushan, who appeared at the Residents’ Welfare Association, said the builders had invaded a common green space for residents and built two towers without the consent of the residents.
He claimed that Supertech had made a fake plan for the building in the High Court and said it had been approved by NOIDA.
“They showed us something in the pamphlet and made something else. What the pamphlet showed us was the garden and instead came up with a huge permanent concrete tower. The builder now claims that it was part of the original plan itself. This is completely wrong. They hid information from us, “he said.
According to Boushan, even at NBCC, the distance between the two buildings may be shortened according to the ordinance, as the new building does not meet the 16-meter distance standard and there are no dead ends without doors, windows or walkways. I heard that I understood. ..
“If you have a garden, you can’t build a building there. You can’t reduce the share of a common area without the consent of the flat owner,” he said.
The real estate company has moved the Supreme Court to challenge the order of the Allahabad High Court to destroy the company’s two 40-story towers in Noida’s housing project.
The two towers, Apex and Ceyane, have a total of 857 apartments. Of these, the family lives in 650 apartments. The tower is part of Supertech’s Emerald Court project.
On April 11, 2014, the Allahabad High Court demolished two buildings within four months and ordered the purchaser of the apartment to refund.
(((The story is published from the wire feed without changing the text. Only the heading has changed)
The Tower of Supertech Emerald Court is clearly built on the wrong green space
https://realtynxt.com/2021/08/04/supreme-court-supertech-emerald-courts-towers-build-on-green-area-palpably-wrong/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=supreme-court-supertech-emerald-courts-towers-build-on-green-area-palpably-wrong The Tower of Supertech Emerald Court is clearly built on the wrong green space