SC orders demolition of Noida twin towers
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered demolition of two 40-storey residential towers of Supertech’s Emerald Court project in Noida over grave violation of building norms, which, the court said, was a result of “nefarious complicity” between the Noida authority and the real estate developer.
A bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and MR Shah directed that Supertech shall carry out the demolition at its own expense and will complete it within three months under the supervision of the Noida authority and an expert body such as the Central Building Research Institute.
Further, the court ordered that Supertech will refund money to all the existing homebuyers in Emerald Court’s Apex and Ceyane towers within two months, along with an interest of 12% per annum from the date of their deposits. Besides, the developer shall shell out ₹2 crore to the Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare Association (RWA), which had led the legal battle against erection of the twin towers on a green area and in breach of the minimum distance norms.
The Supreme Court has also ordered prosecution of officials of Supertech and the Noida authority under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Development Act for flouting the laws and acting in collusion with each other.
The two towers facing demolition have 915 flats of which 633 were booked. Of them, 252 flat buyers still remain as 133 homebuyers have reinvested in other Supertech projects while 248 have taken a refund.
Welcoming the court’s deci
sion, RWA president Rajesh Rana said, “We are thankful to the Indian judiciary for passing the judgment in favour of the homeowners.”
RK Arora, chairman of the Supertech Group, told HT that the developer will file a review petition, asking for a reconsideration of the judgment to demolish the two towers.
In its 140-page judgment, the top court was emphatic that the construction of twin towers flouted various building regulations and that they were allowed to be raised due to Noida authority’s complicity with the developer. The bench pointed out that the authority cleared sanction plans for the towers in 2009 and 2012 in breach of the regulations which mandates a minimum distance of 16 metres between two buildings whereas it was only 9 metres in the present case. Since the height of the towers were allowed to increase from 24 floors to 40 floors (121 metres) in 2012, the court said, the minimum distance between two buildings had to be 20.45 metres under the national building code but the authority did not ensure such compliance.
“The sanction for the construction of Tower-16 and Tower-17 were given by NOIDA (New Okhla Industrial Development Authority) in contravention of the minimum distance requirement provided by the building regulations... the record of this case is replete with instances which highlight the collusion between the officers of NOIDA with the appellant and its management. The case has revealed a nefarious complicity of the planning authority in the violation by the developer of the provisions of law,” it held.
The Noida authority said it will abide with the Supreme Court judgment, adding that it will take strong action against the builder and the officers involved. According to authority’s press release, it has already initiated action against the officers of the planning department for not apprising the senior officials of complete facts during the court proceedings.
Affirming the judgment of the Allahabad high court of April 2014, the court ruled that the construction was also in violation of the Uttar Pradesh Apartment Act since the consent of the flat owners was not sought before modifying the plan promised to them.
The bench maintained that the construction also breached fire safety norms while depriving residents of ventilation, light and air, and thus their quality of life.
The court’s verdict came on a clutch of petitions moved by homebuyers for and against the 2014 verdict of the high court. On April 11, 2014, the Allahabad high court had ordered demolition of the two buildings and refund of money to apartment buyers. The high court had also ordered prosecution of Noida officers concerned for collusion with the developer. In May 2014, the top court stayed the demolition after the reality firm and the Noida authority moved an appeal.
The authority blamed the home buyers for complaining too late and not raising grievances when Supertech was increasing flats and floors in this project with each successive building plan. Supertech’s original building plan of June 2005 provided 550 flats and 14 towers. This was increased to 689 flats in the revised plan in December 2006. The Apex and Ceyane towers with 24 floors came in the third revised plan of November 2009. And in the final plan of March 2012, these two towers were increased from 24 to 40 floors. The authority also said that regulations do not prescribe the minimum distance between two towers but only to the distance between building blocks.
Representing Supertech, senior advocate Vikas Singh cited other housing projects in Noida which had a distance of six to nine metres between towers. He added that it is the discretion of the builder to create a building block by keeping the buildings adjacent to each other or separate so long as the FAR (floor area ratio) permits. Singh submitted that Towers 16 and 17 were part of Tower 1 and had to be treated as a singular block, not requiring to follow the minimum distance criteria.
Supertech further contended that there was no question of seeking consent of the flat owners in 2009 when the sanction plan was approved since the RWA was formed only in 2013.
But the bench shot down all these contentions, holding that the arguments by Supertech and the authority were an “afterthought” to subvert the requirements of minimum distance, fire safety and prior consent of the residents. “A breach by the planning authority of its obligation to ensure compliance with building regulations is actionable at the instance of residents whose rights are infringed by the violation of law. Their quality of life is directly affected by the failure of the planning authority to enforce compliance,” held the court, asserting the RWA’s right to maintain the case.
It noted that illegal constructions were carried out under “the collusion between NOIDA and the appellant (Supertech) to avoid complying with the provisions of the applicable statutes and regulations for monetary gain, at the cost of the rights of the flat purchasers”.One of the homeowners, SK Sharma, who was an office bearer in the RWA when the case was filed, said that his faith in the Indian judiciary has been restored. “It has been a tiresome fight since 2012 but we have finally emerged victorious. Many people told us that we will lose in front of a such a big builder. But we did not quit and were undeterred in our fight.”
On August 4, the top court had reserved its verdict on the batch of pleas while observing that the conduct of the Noida authority “reeks of corruption from the eyes, ears and nose”. It pointed out that when the home buyers asked for the plan, the authority wrote to the developer on whether to share it and refused to give the plan to them at the developer’s behest. The court had said that it was only after the high court expressly directed the authority to give the plan that it did so. Amit Modi, secretary of confederation of real estate developers association of India for Western UP, said, “We can only comment on this judgement once SC’s written order is available. But as it seems it is unfortunate.” A CREDAI official, requesting anonymity, said, “If penalty had been imposed it would have been better for realty market for Noida because demolition is a national loss.” Thousands of homebuyers have been left in the lurch with their life savings stuck as several prominent builders such as Amrapali, Jaypee Infratech and Unitech have failed to finish hundreds of residential projects across Noida and Greater Noida.