ITC LTD. v. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
Tools
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- (year only)
- Bench
- R. V. RAVEENDRAN and B. SUDERSHAN REDDY
- Citation
- [2011] 7 S.C.R. 66
Source PDF (original scan)
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0
If° transfer is permitted, space is transferred c ,J \," . ., II .. .. transfer charges within two years from 'f'L." ~: ·- . . shall be payable to the date of issue of ' h•~ .. ;!-,.I~ 't ~ the Authority. completion certificate
~Therefore if the appellants (2006-2007 allottees) are to be o extended the.aforesaid benefits offered to allottees under the 2008:·SChfi!me:1the rate-of-Rs.70,000/- per sq.m. (the rate of 2008 scheme was '10% more than Rs.70,000/- per sq.m.) clairhed'by the respondents becomes logical and reasonable. We1therefore find.no reason to reject the claim of respondents E that!the:·auotment:fate should be Rs.70,000/- per sq.m. We accord_ingly _grant the appellants an opportunity to save the leases 'by'paying .... ~~~·-{ 'the ... difference in premium at Rs.62600/- per ...... " ~.,
sq.m: to make 1t upto Rs.70,000/- per sq.m.
"70Ctn view of the above we dispose of these appeals as F foll9~ :- ._.. . .• ,.,:r :.
7 (i) The order of.the High Court setting aside the revisional .• order dated fa:2001 of the State Government and the P eg~~c::quentiai'ord~rs of cancellation of allotment of plots G pP~~ed;3.8.t.OP7:.~Y .NOIDA, is affirmed.
I (ii) cThe revis!onal orders dated 8.9.2008 -passed by the
•.•.., .. State Government cancelling ·the allotmentS'·!Of plots to " ,, .appellants, ~re ·set aside.·.. ., ... ~.--- ' • ·~riit-::·ri · ,. H
152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 7 S.C.R.
A (iii) The appellants are given the option to continue their respective leases by paying the premium (allotment rate) at Rs. 70000/- per sq.m. (with corresponding increase in yearly rent/one time lease rent), without any location benefit charges. The appellants shall exercise such option by B 30.9.2011. Such of those appellants exercising the option will be entitled to the following benefits which has been extended in regard to the allottees under 2008 allotment scheme of NOIDA:
(a) 40% of FAR can be used by the allottee as commercial c space (as stipulated in the 2008 scheme).
(b) Permission to pay at its option, the balance to make up 25% of the premium (after adjusting all amounts paid at Rs.7400/- per sq.m. plus location benefit charges) on or before 30.9.2011 and' the balance 75% of premium in sixteen half yearly instalments· commencing from 1.1.2012 · with interest at 11 % per annum (as offered to the applicants in 2008 scheme).
(c) The lessees will be entitled to transfer rights in accordance with the 2008 scheme.
On exercise of such option, the lease shall continue and the period between 1.8.2007 to 31.7.2011 shall be excluded for calculating the lease period of 90 years. F Consequently the period of lease mentioned in the lease deed shall stand extended by a corresponding four years period, so that the lessee has the benefit of the lease for 90 years. An amendment to the lease deed shall be executed between NOIDA and the lessee incorporating the G . aforesaid changes.
(iv) If any appellant is unwilling to continue the lease by . payi,nQ.th~.,higher .premium as aforesaid, or· fails to .,(3~~~~t~AA~\'?lihflS,.pegp,arai{.H)), above1by 30.9.2011, the allotment and consequentiahlease:1n)its favour shall H
ITC.1LTO.:-v. ·STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. 153 [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]
stand cancelled. In that event, NOIDA shall return all r I ' amounts paid by such appellant to NOIDA towards the ~llotment and the Jease, and also reimburse the stamp duty and registratio'n charges incurred by it, with interest at 18% . _per annum from the date of paymenUincurring of such
' .~.amounts to aate·of reimbursement.by NOIDA. If NOIDA B r~turhs·t11e amount to the appellant within 31 ..12.2011, the , rate of interest payable by NOIDA shall be only 11 % per annum insteacfof 18% per annum. ! ,r, - (vi) Parties to 1bear their respective costs. If t; ~ c . II R.P. I 1., ~- -· I. I ,,. . . Appeals disposed of.
l - - - · - _ _.i.:_. - . . I . .
c'{'-.~r'-:-d H·~ ?f,.,~e"~"i "· ,...k, ·, , ... . ~rl
.Jc;·'l w:iicr,.. ~ t ... (" ' ••. ?.01:'3 v:t• ·•r" \A/<Js '· C1'11m1~--i t>~· ,.,., ' ... ,- r · 'ftle th-':"r~J('r~ r· rij "1[1 ' ' ~ that tne z k:V ~nt ,,, , · acc.ord•nr r.-r 1r.t U !:....~J.:~ "'-:' ·~1,_·~1.g ~,.·~ (" ~q m to f'1l"~C If LT•( \_, .
r!J. ln '·:·' t•I ~~ foriO', ·rs
{1} r·K or:'<.· -:>f 1·1~ : urci3, Gd'.'-!J l 13 · ~ ~ - -... ~,,,. '\,.:" tL~_.. ·!~ f U i1.
c.-~~t.;:.""' :- e.2oc ~~ I , •
(') 1 i .<'.\,. i.. ' : ~cf.,. 0.r· ..,. .•r ., · · -hi;..,.·:- •• :in;, r~{.
Report an error in this judgment →
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0