Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: common plot in Sanjivkumar Pravinkumar Shah & vs State Of Gujarat & 5 on 4 April, 2016Matching Fragments
12. The respondent society filed its affidavitinreply and has opposed any grant of relief as prayed for by the petitioners. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has also filed affidavitin reply.
13. Mr.Deven Parikh, learned senior advocate assisted by Mr.S.P.Majmudar, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the owners of two flats in the Ratnamani Apartment situated in the Democratic Society and they have never shown any interest in selling the property to anybody and therefore they have not consented to sell or transfer their flats. He would further submit that the Mahalaxmi Society as well as the Democratic Society in connivance with each other has created certain documents by which they have tried to establish that the property was sold by the present petitioners through their power of attorney, which is a fake one and the petitioners have already filed a criminal case as well as civil suit. He would further submit that a resolution dated 11.09.2013 HC-NIC Page 5 of 9 Created On Sat Apr 23 02:12:08 IST 2016 passed by the Democratic Society has been passed as if all the members have agreed to sell the property to the Mahalaxmi Society. He would further submit that though the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation was fully aware about the objections raised by the petitioners as well as stay granted by the Court, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation ought not to have granted 'Rajachithhi' dated 23.09.2015 and subsequently dated 03.02.2016. He would further submit that the plans put up by the Mahalaxmi Society and approved by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation are on the surmises that both the plots have been amalgamated, which, in fact, is contrary to facts and the petitioners had never sold their flats to any other persons. He would further submit that the authority has included plot of 440 Sq. mtrs. which belongs to the Democratic Society and while passing plan, a common plot has been shown, which is required to be maintained under GDCR, is of the Democratic Society and therefore, the authority ought not to have approved plan permitting construction of additional two floors.