Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(vii) The appellant, in collusion with NOIDA, obtained sanctions for the layout map in violation of the mandatory requirement for space to be maintained between building blocks and clear space;

(viii) The provisions of the UP Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Act 2005 19 were required to be complied with, according to which the minimum distance of 7.5 mtrs. between building blocks and a clear space must be provided, which has been violated in the third revised plan of 2012;

88 The above averments would belie the submission sought to be advanced before this Court that Apex and Ceyane are parts of a cluster of buildings comprised within one block. The High Court, while rejecting the submission, observed:

“Learned counsel for the respondent-company finally made an attempt to argue that the phase “building blocks” is not defined under the byelaws and according to the learned senior advocate building blocks would mean the entire building on plot no. 4 of Sector 93A NOIDA. The said argument is farfetched and against the provisions of the Building Regulation of 2006 as well as 2010. Building blocks means group of building on the plot/site. The sanctioned maps clearly shows that the respondent company has got the layout approved consisting of separate blocks. The nomenclature of the blocks was subsequently changed by the respondent company, in each successive plan and finally the buildings were numbered as towers (1-17). The maps sanctioned clearly shows that the buildings in dispute Aster II (tower 1) and Apex and Ceyane (tower 16 and 17) are separate building blocks. The argument has been advanced without there being any foundation in the pleadings. Without pleadings argument cannot be advanced.”