Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.23 seconds)

Priyanka Estate International (P.) ... vs State Of Assam And Ors. on 28 July, 2006

17. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Priyanka Estates International Pvt. Ltd. & Ors vs. State of Assam reported in (2010) 2 SCC 27 [hereinafter referred as Priyanka Estates International Pvt. Ltd. (II)] wherein the Supreme Court while affirming the judgment of the learned Division Bench has also observed at paragraph 50 that if the constructions are in absolute violation of the sanctioned or approved plans and are not likely to fall in the category of compoundable items, then the necessary consequence is to order its demolition and seal of approval for such illegal activities is not required to be given by this Court. In paragraph 55 of the said judgment, the Supreme Court further observed that illegal and unauthorised constructions beyond the sanctioned plans are on rise, may be due to paucity of land in big cities. Such activities are required to be dealt with a Page No.# 14/17 firm hands otherwise builders/colonisers would continue to build or construct beyond the sanctioned and approved plans and would still go scot-free. Ultimately, it is the flat owners who fall prey to such activities as the ultimate desire of a common man is to have a shelter of his own. The Supreme Court further observed that such unlawful constructions are definitely against the public interest and hazardous to the safety of occupiers and residents of multi- storeyed buildings. To some extent, both parties can be said to be equally responsible for this. Still the greater loss would be of those flat owners whose flats are to be demolished as compared to the Builder. In the said case, the Supreme Court, however, did not exercise the power under Article 142 of the Constitution, but granted liberty to those flats owners whose flats are ultimately going to be demolished, to exhaust the remedy that may be available to them in accordance with law against the builder. Paragraphs 50, 55 to 62 being relevant are reproduced hereinunder:
Gauhati High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 79 - B S Reddy - Full Document
1   2 Next