Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

28. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submits that in the month of March, 2013, the respondent no.1 had forwarded the drafts of the modified permanent alternate accommodation agreement for execution by the members of the petitioner which contained a clause authorizing the respondent no.1 to advertise on facade of the building. He submits that the only objection raised by the petitioner was by its letter dated 23rd April, 2013 against insertion of clause 17 in the draft permanent alternate accommodation agreement. No objection was raised in respect of the terms and conditions of the scheme of redevelopment of the building under SRA scheme. He submits that on 23rd April, 2013 six permanent alternate accommodation agreements were executed by the members of the arbp1339-14 petitioner society with the respondent no.1 in respect of flat nos.601, 904, 602, 901, 504 and 804 respectively which agreements were duly confirmed by the Honorary Chairman and the Secretary for and on behalf of the petitioner society.

34. My attention is invited to a letter dated 12th June, 2015 addressed by the respondent no.1 to the petitioner intimating about the receipt of part occupation certificate from the respondent no.2 and calling upon the petitioner to take possession of the flats allotted for the members of the petitioner. In the said letter, the respondent no.1 also showed its willingness to execute permanent alternate accommodation agreements with the remaining members of the petitioner with whom execution of permanent alternate accommodation agreements were pending. My attention is also invited to a letter dated 15th June, 2015 from the petitioner to the respondent no.1 refusing to take possession of the flats of its members.

48. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 invited my attention to various such agreements entered into between the members of the petitioner society which refers to the plans sanctioned arbp1339-14 by the respondent no.2 under Regulation 33(14)(D) of the D.C. Regulation.

49. A perusal of the record prima-facie indicates that the respondent no.1 has already constructed flats upto 10th floor out of which all the members of the petitioner society were allotted flats and also commercial premises. The respondent no.2 has already granted partial occupation certificate in respect of the construction already carried out by the respondent no.1. The respondent no.1 has already called upon the petitioner to take possession of the respective flats allotted to the members of the petitioner society. The respondent no.1 has also agreed to execute permanent alternate accommodation agreements with the remaining members of the petitioner society. The petitioner however, did not agree to take possession of the tenements allotted to the members of the petitioner society and did not show its readiness and willingness to execute permanent alternate accommodation agreements in respect of the remaining members who have not signed such agreements so far. There is no ad-interim reliefs granted in favour of the petitioner by this Court in the present proceedings. There is gross delay on the part of the petitioner in approaching this Court in this petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act.

59. The letter of intent was issued on 14th November, 2011. IOD was issued by the respondent no.2 on 27 th December, 2011. The commencement certificate was issued on 5th March, 2012. The respondent no.1 had forwarded all the agreements for permanent alternate accommodation to the petitioner on 19th June, 2012. A perusal of the record indicates that the only objection of the petitioner to the agreement was that clause 17 of the draft permanent alternate accommodation shall be deleted. The petitioner did not raise any objection on the permissions granted by the respondent no.2 referred in various documents executed by and between the parties. Last of such documents entered into between the parties are in the month of arbp1339-14 July,2015.