NEW DELHI: Real estate company Supertech Ltd told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that its owner in the Emerald Court, the Resident Welfare Association, which challenged the construction of two 40-story towers, was terrorizing the builder with unwarranted claims .
The residents’ welfare association said Supertech flouted building safety standards and distance criteria, while also constructing the twin towers encroaching on the garden and thus blocking view, air and traffic. sun of the residents.
Senior lawyer Vikas Singh, representing Supertech Ltd, told a bench of Judges DY Chandrachud and MR Shah that there had been no violation of the standards claimed by the Residents Welfare Association in the construction of twin towers.
The bench told Singh that what his client did was clearly wrong as the towers were built encroaching on the housing company’s green common space.
Singh said: “The residents’ welfare association terrorized the builder by making unwarranted claims.”
Senior counsel said he would argue on the merits and counter the Residents’ Welfare Association’s arguments on Wednesday.
“They raised new points in the Supreme Court that have never been debated in the High Court. I would like to put everything on the affidavit that I will file Wednesday morning before the start of the court’s work,” he said. declared.
The bench allowed Singh to file the affidavit and released the case for Wednesday.
The Supreme Court is hearing appeals from Supertech Ltd and other petitions filed by home buyers for or against the 2014 Allahabad High Court order ordering the demolition of the Twin Towers for violating standards.
During the hearing, lawyer Gaurav Agrawal, appointed amicus curiae in the case, said that many home buyers, who booked apartments in the New Twin Towers, were reimbursed for the payment while many were chose to wait. He said that if this court maintains the existence of these Twin Towers, then the court will have to look at the problems faced by the residents of Towers 1 and 2, or around 88 families, who reside there.
Agrawal suggested that if the court upholds the Allahabad High Court order ordering the demolition of the two towers, it must be done by a specialist agency and because there are many residential towers nearby.
“As was done during the demolition of buildings in Maradu, Kerala, people will need to be evacuated and the demolition can then be carried out using explosives. The possibility of impact on residential towers due to the controlled explosion cannot be excluded because all these buildings are connected to a common basement, ”Agrawal said.
He further suggested that if the court decides that the twin buildings are in violation of the standards, then it would be better to ask the builder to pay double the compensation to the residents of Tower-1 and Tower-2, in order to that they can buy an apartment nearby in the same neighborhood.
The bench said he couldn’t force homebuyers to leave, to which the amicus said it had to be with consent.
He said the court needed to balance the rights of 88 families with more than 300 families residing in other residential towers in the Emerald Court Project and take a considerable point of view.
Lawyer Ravindra Kumar, representing the authority of NOIDA, said there was nothing wrong with the sanction he gave to the construction plan and that no standards were violated at all.
“As an authority, I am not aware and am not supposed to be aware of the transactions between home buyers and the builder and what was shown to them in the project brochure,” he said. -he declares.
Kumar said it is very easy to make allegations against a public authority but difficult to substantiate them.
At first, senior lawyer Jayant Bhushan, representing the Residents’ Welfare Association, said the builder constructed the two towers encroaching on the common green space intended for residents, without their consent.
He alleged that Supertech even produced a fake plan of the building in the High Court, claiming it was approved by NOIDA.
“They showed us something in the brochure and built something else. What we were shown in the brochure was a garden and instead he proposed huge permanent concrete towers. The builder now claims that this was part of the original plan itself. This is completely false. They withheld information from us, “he said.
Bhushan said that even the NBCC found that the new buildings do not meet the 16-meter distance criteria and that there is no dead end site without doors, windows or path, which would have reduced the distance between two buildings in accordance with the regulations. .
“If there is a garden, you cannot build a building there. You cannot cut off the share of the common areas without the consent of the apartment owners,” he said.
The real estate company had moved the Supreme Court to challenge the Allahabad High Court order to demolish the company’s two 40-story towers in a housing project in Noida.
The two towers, Apex and Ceyane, together have 857 apartments. Of these, families reside in 650 apartments. The towers are part of Supertech’s Emerald Court project.
On April 11, 2014, the Allahabad High Court ordered the demolition of the two buildings within four months and the refund of the money to the apartment buyers.