Friday, August 20, 2010

Status of case before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India

Dear Member,

This is in reference to AGM dated 01/08/2010 wherein it was clarified that the matter on various issues raised in Court Commissioners' Report are before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which will be heard on 16/08/2010.

The case was heard by the Division Bench on the day & directed to M/s. Durga Builders (P) Ltd to file the objections on pending IAs 8 & 9 in four weeks. Now the case will be listed for hearing after six weeks.

The proceeding is going on as per system of law and under the circumstances, we have to wait for final decision in due course.


-MP Pandey,
General Secretary (Honorary)


  1. Next hearing date 4th October 2010

    Court orders are at:

  2. Dear Fellow Members,


    Recently, Conveyance Deeds in respect of Supreme Court petitioners were executed through the Association. I am a member of this Association since its inception in early 1990s and Shri M.P. Pandey is its Honorary Secretary since then. I had never defaulted in paying dues to the Association, including Legal Charges, as and when demanded by the Association. The following vital facts were not considered before the execution of Sale Deeds:

    a) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 20.1.1999 in WP No.792/1996 appointed Shri P. Raghavendra Rao, Director, Town & Country Planning (Haryana), Chandigarh to fix the category of Supreme Court petitioners. Shri Rao, former Director, in his order dated 25.2.1999, fixed the category of Supreme Court petitioners upto a plot measuring 263 sq.yds., I repeat 263 sq.yds, as No Profit No Loss (NPNL).

    b) Shri R.K. Nanda, MD, M/s. Durga Builders Pvt. Ltd., committed in the Supreme Court that the rates for Internal Development Charges (IDC) in respect of NPNL category were Rs.550/- per sq.yd. Further, on the directions of Supreme Court, the petitioners paid Rs.600/- per sq.yd. which includes IDC and EDC.

    c) Only after realization of above dues, M/s. Durga Builder physically handed over possession of plots in January 2000. A thing can be handed over only after realization of its all dues.

    d) Revised Plan for Phase-I and Phase-II was approved after cutting bigger plots to accommodate Supreme Court petitioners. The Supreme Court directed to allot a plot of size 112 sq.mtrs. (134 sq.yds.) to all petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners deposited the amount for 134 sq.yds. The builder allotted different size plots on his own. While some petitioners were allotted enlarge size plots, others size was reduced to as low as 99.50 sq.yds.

    e) The Association took Rs.4,500/- per sq.yd. from members whose plots have been enlarged in violation of rates fixed in the Supreme Court. It was not explained to the members that the Supreme Court had fixed the rate at Rs.600/- per sq.yd. and the builder is not following the Court’s orders. In that case, the Association should have initiated Contempt of Court proceedings against the builder instead of reaching to an out-of-court settlement and surrendering before the builder.

    f) If we have to go in for out-of-court settlements with the builder, the same could have reached in the year 2000 at the time of handing over of physical possession of the plots. Why the Association took ten long years to get the plots registered and wasted money in paying fees of advocates? I fail to understand that when the Supreme Court had fixed Rs. 600/- per sq.yd. for plots upto size 263 sq. yds, then why did we pay Rs.4,500/- per sq.yd. to the builder. The builder, knowing fully well the implications of Supreme Court’s orders, showed an amount of Rs.600/- per sq.yd. plus land cost in the Registries of respective members instead of actual amount of Rs.4,500/-. This stand of the builder corroborates the fact that he had already received full amount of land cost, IDC and EDC in respect of NPNL category.

    g) Such out-of-court settlements with the builder will not only affect the case of Supreme Court petitioners, but the other cases will also have its adverse implications.

    Hoping that a good sense will soon prevail upon our Executive Members and they will start acting for the welfare of the members of the Association and not for the welfare of the builder.


    Sunil K. Sehgal

  3. Dear Shri Pandey,

    It was announced by you in the General Body meeting on 1.8.2010 held at the Sri Ram Centre, Mandi House, New Delhi that the report of Court Commissioner is available at our blog for the perusal of all members, but it is still not available. It is requested that the same may please be posted for the information of all members of the Association.

    The details about the IAs 8 & 9, clearly explaining their implications and stand of our Association on the matter, may also be provided.

    Thank you,

    Sunil K. Sehgal

  4. Dear Fellow Members,


    A period of more than five months has lapsed since the Conveyance Deeds in respect of Supreme Court petitioners were executed. It seems that the Association had taken no concrete steps regarding recovery of money in respect of those plotholders who got lesser size of plots. The following points need immediate attention:

    a) The Supreme Court petitioners paid the amount for a plot measuring 134 sq.yds. The Colonizer, on his own, reduced and enlarged the size of plots of many petitioners. The sizes of plot of some petitioners were reduced up to 34.50 sq.yds. and the same was at once brought to the notice of the Association by respective members and Association assured the members that they were seized of the matter and would take appropriate directions from Supreme Court at the time of Registries.

    b) Shri M.P. Pandey, General Secretary, announced in the General Body meeting on 1.8.2010 that a line has been added in the Conveyance Deeds of those plot holders whose size has been reduced that the excess payment made will be adjusted by the builder in subsequent payments. It is true that the colonizer mentioned full amount of Rs.96,480/-, or as the case may be, in the Registries but he adjusted the full amount in allotting lesser size of plots. Colonizer has also mentioned in the Registries that in lieu of the amount received (full amount for 134 sq.yds.), he has allotted a plot of size 99.50 sq.yds. It is not at all mentioned in our Registries that we have paid money for a plot of size 134 sq.yds. The amount for a plot of 99.50 sq.yds comes to Rs.71,640/- (Rs.120/- Land Cost plus Rs.600/- IDCs and EDCs). The colonizer adjusted the whole amount of 134 sq.yds plot for allotting a lesser size plots in violation of Supreme Court orders. The Association should have ensured that it is mentioned in our Registries that the petitioners have paid amount for a plot of 134 sq.yds, but the Conveyance Deed is being made for a plot of lesser size and the balance amount is pending with the colonizer. Most of the petitioners got a plot of size 134 sq.yds. for an amount of Rs.96,480/- whereas the reduced size plotholders got smaller plots at the same price without their fault.

    c) A cheating case against the colonizer may be filed by the Association to safeguard the interest of lesser size plotholders. In that case, it may be clearly mentioned that, on the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, the petitioners paid an amount for a plot of size 134 sq.yds but at the time of Registries, the colonizer forged the language and adjusted the whole amount for allotting lesser size of plots.

    d) We solicit the comments of Shri Mohinder Singh, our esteemed Executive Member, and other fellow members on the forgery committed at the time of execution of Registries. It may please be explained how the lesser size plotholders will get their money back, which the colonizer has forged through a legal document. The forged money was paid twenty years ago and a lot of other amount was spent as Legal Charges so that the interest of petitioners is safeguarded, Had that money been invested in some other land, the petitioners could have fetched high returns! Frustration to a person will automatically come when after twenty years of long legal battle, the person is duped again. It is a fact that the Association is seized of all the facts about the allotment of lesser size plots to many petitioners and pressed its members to accept allotment first and the Association will take care of excess payment/allotment of lesser size plots later. At the time of Registries, the Association bargained with the colonizer at the cost of reduced size plotholders and brought the price down to Rs.4,500/- per sq.yd. for enhanced size plotholders. Association only took care of the interest of enhanced size plotholders. Now, we feel cheated after two decades of legal battle and hope the same will not be repeated to our other fellow members.


    Sunil K. Sehgal

  5. Can anybody tell what is this all about. We are still waiting for possessions of our plots and the speed with which the case is going on I think our grand children even can not expect to live in it.
    Can't we expediate the matter and can anyone tell us what are the remidies available with us if we don't want to wait..... this long....

    please give response on

  6. Sir can u tell me what is the latest information regarding the court case date...??

  7. Sir ,can anybody give the decision copy of the M/s durga builder case on thank you.

  8. Sir, I want to contact you people. Please provide your Mobile/Landline Number so I contact you. Or you can contact me on or 9871357251.

  9. This comment has been removed by the author.