Jharkhand High Court
United India Trading Enterprises Pvt ... vs Adityapur Industrial Area Development ... on 29 March, 2016
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (C) No. 1328 of 2014
...
United India Trading Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,
Town Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum ... ...Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
1. Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority,
through its MD, Adityapur, Seraikella Kharsawan
2. The Secretary, AIADA,
Adityapur, Seraikella Kharsawan ... ...Respondents
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
...
For the Petitioner : - Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate.
For the Respondent-AIADA :- M/s Ashok Kr. Singh
& Vishal Kr. Singh, Advs.
...
06/29.03.2016Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is auction purchaser of shed no. 18, plot no. 509 (P) in Khata No. 71, Mouza- Asangi, District- Seraikella, area 5,000/- Sq. ft. in the VIth Phase of Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority (AIADA). Plot was put on auction sale by Allahabad Bank under SARFAESI proceeding under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assests and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Certificate of sale was confirmed on 18.02.2011 and possession thereof was handed over to the petitioner-company on 15.02.2012, Annexure-1. Erstwhile allottee M/s Sentinal Chemical Industries had become defaulter leading to realization of outstanding dues through SARFAESI proceeding by Allahabad Bank. Petitioner though put in possession was not lawfully transferred the lease of the plot by the respondent- AIADA, has approached this Court being aggrieved by delay in execution of lease deed despite confirmation of auction sale in his favour and possession handed over to him in 2012 itself.
According to the petitioner, he has suffered for four long years due to non execution of lease deed in his favour.
The respondent- AIADA in its counter affidavit have taken plea that framing of regulations were in process in view of the pronouncement rendered by the learned Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 204 of 2011. Adityapur Industrial Area Development Authority Regulations, 2015 have come into force w.e.f. 16.10.2015. AIADA has no difficulty in regularizing the lease hold right in respect of shed in question subject to declaration that SARFEASI Appeal No. 04 of 2011 pending before the DRT, Ranchi has been disposed of in favour of the Allahabad Bank, Jamshedpur and there are no litigation pending in respect of the shed. It is also subject to clearance of dues of previous allottee by the petitioner for regularization of lease hold right.
In view of the aforesaid stand of the respondent- AIADA, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now competent authority under the respondent- AIADA has to take a decision for execution of lease deed in respect of plot in question in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law. Petitioner has also stated on affidavit that SARFEASI Appeal No. 04 of 2011 pending before the DRT, Ranchi was dismissed vide order dated 28.01.2015, Annexure-5 to I. A. No. 218 of 2016. He, however, submits that petitioner may be given liberty to seek damages in respect of loss caused to it due to delay in execution of lease deed on the part of AIADA on independent grounds available to him.
There is no gainsaying the fact that if the petitioner has remedy in law to seek damages, it is open for him to do so.
However, taking note of the relevant facts now borne on record, it is only proper to dispose of the writ petition so that competent authority under the respondent- AIADA would take a decision in respect of execution of lease deed in favour of the petitioner on being satisfied with fulfillment of all such conditions prescribed as per law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) Kamlesh/