Maradu Flats Case : Supreme Court Directs Jain Housing To Deposit Rs 12.26 Crores In 4 Months; Allows Golden Kayaloram To Dispose One Property
story
In connection with the Maradu flats demolition, the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday directed one of the four builders - Jain Housing Ltd- to deposit a portion of compensation amount due to owners( Rs 12.26 crores) in two equal installments within four months.The Court said that it will consider Jain Housing's request for permission to dispose of one of its properties after it deposits...
Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
In connection with the Maradu flats demolition, the Supreme Court of India on Wednesday directed one of the four builders - Jain Housing Ltd- to deposit a portion of compensation amount due to owners( Rs 12.26 crores) in two equal installments within four months.
The Court said that it will consider Jain Housing's request for permission to dispose of one of its properties after it deposits the first installment.
The bench of Justices Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari noted that the Justice K. Balakrishnan Committee has calculated a sum of Rs.28.53 crores towards the share of M/S Jain Housing. By its order dated September 27, 2019, the bench had required Jain Housing to deposit 16.5 crores.
The bench was now informed, and it recorded that the fact is also undisputed, that so far only Rs. 2 crores have come to be deposited. The bench noted that the properties of Jain Housing have all been attached by virtue of the court's orders. An offer has been made by the builder with respect to two of its properties, which if it is allowed to dispose of, it would be in a position to meet its liabilities. The necessary valuation of the properties has been submitted to the Committee. The Committee has assessed the value of the same as 85.25 crores, while the valuation is of 93.27 crores by Jain Housing.
Before the bench, it was submitted that this property alone is sufficient to meet the existing liabilities and any possible enhancement of the same. A prayer was made that the other properties of the said Builder be released from attachment.
Senior advocate Dr AM Singhvi, for Jain Housing, submitted that the aforesaid lands are no more the subject of mortgage. It was submitted that the mortgage stands relieved. Further, Dr Singhvi asserted that his clients are also willing to furnish before the Supreme Court an undertaking on affidavit that the property stands released from mortgage. The bench required the said affidavit to be filed in two weeks.
Amicus Curiae Gaurav Agarwal advanced that at this stage, Jain Housing is required to make a further deposit of Rs.12.26 crores, subject to which the court may consider its request. In the said circumstances, the bench initially directed that subject to the filing of the undertaking in two weeks and subject to the deposit of Rs.12.26 crores within a maximum period of three months, the other properties of Jain Housing may stand released. The bench required status quo to be maintained until such time and directed that no properties be released until the deposit is made.
Mr. Agarwal pointed out that it has been revealed in discussions with the builder that Jain Housing is not in a position to deposit the required amount until its other properties are released. "Let them manage the money. At best, we can allow for a provision of instalments", observed Justice Sinha. Finally, the bench amended its order to grant two months' time to Jain Housing for the deposit of the first instalment of Rs. 6.12 crores. The entire deposit of 12.26 crores is required to be made within 4 months.
The order passed in Jain Housing's case reads as follows :
"We direct M/s. Jain Housing to deposit a sum of Rs.12.26 crores in two installments within four months. The first installment of Rs.6.12 crores must be deposited within two months. Only thereafter we shall consider release of the attached properties. Till then status quo will continue with regard to attached properties"
Case of Golden Kayaloram
In respect of M/S Vichus Constructions (Golden Kayaloram), the bench noted that the builder was required to deposit Rs. 13.37 crores initially. The court observed that Rs. 2.98 crores have come to be deposited so far.
Senior advocate Mr Kapil Sibal, for Vichus Constructions, submitted that his client is willing to submit forthwith a further amount of Rs. 3.86 crores if it is permitted to dispose of one property for which it has entered into an agreement to sell.
"At the present moment, we permit the builder to do so and allow defreezing of the bank account only for the limited purpose to allow this deposit", ordered the bench.
Mr. Sibal submitted that his client shall endeavour to make the deposit within 2-3 weeks, as against the 6-week deadline, and sought the court's permission to file an application for the de-freezing of the builder's other bank accounts on making the deposit. "Everything is frozen right now", he pleaded.
"We won't say anything on that aspect right now. Your dues will still be outstanding", remarked Justice Sinha. In a lighter vein, the judge commented, "Does a counsel need the court's permission to file an application?"
The order passed in the case of Golden Kayaloram apartment reads as :
"...we permit Mr. Sibal's client to do soand lift the freeze on the bank accounts of M/s.VichusConstructions only for the limited purpose to facilitate receipt of the deposit within six months. In case of any issues, liberty is granted to mention"
It may be noted that following the demolition of the four apartment complexes that were built in violation of CRZ norms in Kochi's Maradu area, the Supreme Court had directed the Kerala government to file its response on action taken against other buildings that violate CRZ norms.
During the hearing on Wednesday, Justice Sinha indicated to Mr Agarwal that the Kerala state Chief Secretary was to submit an affidavit on the fixation of liability which has not been done so far. This was when Mr Sibal argued, "We might have been at fault also, but why must we be singled out?". Mr. Agarwal assured the Court that he shall follow up in this behalf.
In September last year, taking a serious note of violations to the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms, the Supreme Court had followed up with the Kerala state government yet again, to check whether its directions have been followed in 'letter and spirit'. This was in continuance with the directives laid out after the May 8, 2019, demolition order of apartments in Kochi's Maradu. The apex court had sought a response to this effect from the chief secretary of Kerala in four weeks. The bench of Justices RF Nariman, Sinha and KM Joseph, took up the matter as a follow up of a contempt petition filed by two persons, who alleged non-compliance of the court's order of September 23, 2019. The SC had sought to understand the volume of violation of CRZ norms across Kerala.
Finally, the bench, on Wednesday, urged the counsel that their approach must be such that the intervention of the Supreme Court as at this stage is kept at the minimum- "Now, we have a claim for interest. We don't know how many more claims will come. If you continue like this, you will be before this court for 30 years. This is what we called in Hindi 'Bhanumathi ka pitaara'! If we keep this pending, we don't know where we will end up. We need to move ahead in a planned manner"
Click here to read/download the order