Boutique Litigation Law Firm - Retain Lawyers - Research based Law Firm - Complete legal services

The SC sets aside cancellation of residential plots, on the ground of change in layout plan from commercial to residential, by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

Supreme Court of India

Chief Justice S A Bobde, Justice S Abdul Nazeer and Justice Sanjiv Khanna

The SC {MADHYA PRADESH HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND ANOTHER v. VIJAY BODANA AND OTHERS} holds that the writ petition challenging the orders dated 12th May 2008 and 24th September 2008 was filed in 2015, nearly seven years after the approval for modification was granted. It was held that in the meanwhile, 42 out of 52 plots had been sold to third parties for consideration. Further hold that the impugned judgment notices that many of these bonafide owner/purchasers had completed the construction and some houses were in advanced stages of construction. It was held that while the High Court has noticed and recorded these facts, it has failed to give due credence to the delay, the change in position and creation of third party rights by wrongly applying the principle of promissory estoppel and lis pendens. It was held that Innocent plot owners on whom the brunt had fallen were not even heard before they were deprived and denied their rights by the adverse order. Further held that considerable delay and laches of nearly seven years in approaching the court had resulted in change in position as third-party rights had been created. It was held that in view of delay and laches, the High Court should not have entertained the writ petition as 42 plot owners who had paid money would suffer adverse consequences for no fault of theirs. Accordingly the judgment of the HC was set aside by the SC.

Further held that the Ujjain Municipal Corporation was not made a party and had no opportunity to represent their stand on the change in the layout plan. If required and felt necessary, the High Court could have issued notice to the Ujjain Municipal Corporation and obtained their opinion. It was held that stand of the State Government of Madhya Pradesh and the authorities under the Adhiniyam, supporting the modification, was on record. Further held that normally opposition and prejudice should not be presumed, unless there are grounds and reasons. It was held that given the fact that the change in the present case was from commercial to residential, there was no ground and reason that would suggest objection or opposition from the Ujjain Municipal Corporation.

In the present case, the quashing and setting aside of the order dated 12th May 2008 of the Commissioner, Ujjain and the order dated 24th September 2008 of the Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Ujjain approving the change in the layout plan of Indira Nagar, Ujjain by the High Court was assailed before the SC. In view of above, the appeal was allowed by the SC, and the residential plots were restored to owners/ purchasers.

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published