Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

1. Heard Sri Prashant Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 and Sri Sushanshu Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.1.

2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:-

"(a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari to quash the recovery certificate dated 25.11.2023 bearing No.14229/UPRERA/Vasooli/2023-24 (Contained as Annexure No.1) issued by respondent no.1 (Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow at Naveen Bhavan, Raj Niyojan Sansthan, Kalakar House, Old Hyderabad, Lucknow-226007 through its Secretary) to respondent no.2 (District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar) in respect of the petitioners.
(b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the letter no.14230/UPRERA/Anu-Vasooli/2022-23 dated 25.11.2023 (contained as Annexure No.2) issued by respondent no.1 (Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow at Naveen Bhavan, Raj Niyojan Sansthan, Kalakar House, Old Hyderabad, Lucknow-226007 through its Secretary) to respondent no.2 (District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar) in respect of the petitioners.
(c) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing respondent no.1 (Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow at Naveen Bhavan, Raj Niyojan Sansthan, Kalakar House, Old Hyderabad, Lucknow-226007 through its Secretary) and respondent no.2 (District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar) not to take any coercive actin against the petitioners on the basis of the impugned recovery certificate dated 25.11.2023 (contained as Annexure No.)."

4. Opposite party no.3 launched a project namely, Viva City Square, on Plot No.543/9, Block-K, Plan No.2 situated at Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur, U.P. and registered itself as proprietor of the said project at UPRERA portal bearing Promoter Registration No.UPRERAPRM9901 as well as UPRERA Registration No.UPRERAPRJ6667. The petitioners were not registered as co-promoters. Certain persons, who were the allottees, raised a complaint before the UPRERA regarding the conduct of the builder company i.e. opposite party no.3. After the complaint was registered and adjudicated, a recovery certificate was issued. Such recovery certificate is now been tried to be executed against the petitioners, who are not the proprietors of the said project.

9. This Court is of the opinion that the petitioners' case does not fall in any of the existences as mentioned in paragraph 11 of the judgement rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (supra).

10. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that the petitioners being not mentioned as proprietors, cannot be proceeded with in pursuance of the recovery certificate dared 25.11.2023. The Complaint No.LKO157/07/55720/2020, Lalit Kumar Singh Vs. M/s College Group Infrastructure Private Limited, was not against the petitioners and the petitioners were not heard when the order was passed by the UPRERA on 01.04.2021.