Dismissed

Indranil Chatterjee v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and 6 Others

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2021WRIC/4580/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking quashing of certificates and mandamus for possession and interest in a housing project was dismissed by the Court as not pressed by the petitioner after the respondent counsel relied on a pending Supreme Court裁决 regarding the underlying insolvency proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner voluntarily withdrew from pressing the writ petition, resulting in dismissal.

Indranil Chatterjee Vs Government of Uttar… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 21

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4580 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Indranil Chatterjee Respondent :- Government Of Uttar Pradesh And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Avanish Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh,Rohan Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. Shri Rohan Gupta, Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh and Shri Shivam Shukla appear for the respondents.

¶6

Present petition has been preferred for following reliefs:-

¶7

"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned Partial Occupancy Certificate dated 11.6.2018 issued by the New Okhla Development Authority for Group Housing Project Jaypee Greens 'AMAN' Noida Distt. Gautam Buddha Nagar-respondent no.3 (Annexure No.12 to the writ petition) and for quashing of the offer of possession dated 13.6.2018 issued by respondent nos.4 & 5 with the approval of respondent no.6 for an Unfurnished Unit Reference No.AMN0070402 in the aforesaid Group Housing Project (Annexure No.14 to the writ petition) and for quashing the order dated 1.4.2020 imposing the Holding and Maintenance Charge on all units of group housing project Jaypee Greens 'AMAN' Noida District Gautam Budha Nagar (Annexure No.20 to the writ petition).

¶8

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.4, 5 and 6 to recalculate the Basic Sales Price and other charges on the basis of 'Carpet Area' in accordance with RERA Act 2016 and Rules framed thereunder and to execute the Sub-Lease Deed of Unit Reference No.AMN0070402 in accordance with the provision of U.P. Rules, 2018 without imposing additional cost.

¶9

iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.4, 5 and 6 to hand over the possession of the Unit Reference No.AMN0070402 Group Housing Project Jaypee Greens, 'AMAN' Noida Distt. Gautam Budh Nagar to the petitioner in a furnished state as per specification mentioned in the provisional allotment letter dated 25.4.2011.

¶10

iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos.4, 5 & 6 to pay the interest @ 12% per annum on the amount already paid by the petitioner for the delay of about 7 years in possession of Unit Reference No.AMN0070402 to the petitioner and the petitioner be further compensated by an exemplary cost of Rs.20 lacs for breach of Statutory Obligations, mental agony and harassment caused to the petitioner."

¶11

On the matter being taken up today, learned counsel for the respondents has placed the order dated 10.09.2020 passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil appeal Diary No(s).14741 of 2020 (Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association & Ors. v. NBCC (India) Ltd. & Ors.), which for ready reference is quoted as under:-

¶12

"Our attention was drawn by the counsel appearing for the Interim Resolution Professional to the application filed by Interim Resolution Professional being I.A. No.89385/2020. In our opinion, since the entire resolution plan is pending consideration in these proceedings before this Court, it is appropriate that no coercive action be taken

¶13

by any person/ authority against the company until further orders on the principle underlying Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

¶14

I.A. No.89385/2020 is accordingly disposed of.

¶15

The arguments of the main proceedings are inconclusive.

¶16

For further arguments, list the matters on 14th September, 2020 at the end of the Board."

¶17

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to entertain present writ petition at this stage.

¶18

Once the Court has proceeded to indicate its mind in negative, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that he does not intend to press the present writ petition.

¶19

Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.

¶20

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.

¶21

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.2.2021 SP/

Indranil Chatterjee v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indranil Chatterjee v. Government of Uttar Pradesh and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamla Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Faisal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandip Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sunita Choudhary Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S Hind Agro Industries Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Bank of Baroda Vs Om Prakash Tiwari and 4 Others