Disposed

V Rajagopalan v. Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

NGT4 Apr 2024IA No. 52/2024 in Original Application No. 79/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant, having sold the disputed property, sought to continue a grievance regarding sewage and environmental nuisance from his residence. The Tribunal held that the cause of action ceased to exist due to the alienation, leading to the abatement of the application and dismissal of the plea to implead the welfare association.

What did the court decide?

Original Application No.79 of 2023 and Interlocutory Application No.52 of 2024 dismissed.

V Rajagopalan vs Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | NGT (2024)

¶1

Item No.06:

¶2

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI

¶3

Thursday, the 04^th day of April, 2024.

¶4

(Through Video Conference)

¶5

Original Application No.79 of 2023(SZ) & I.A. No.52 of 2024(SZ)

¶6

IN THE MATTER OF:

¶7

V. Rajagopalan

¶8

Tower No: T8 , Door No: TF 36, Ashiana Shubham , Phase 1, Govindapuram, S P Koil, Chengelpet District, Chennai - 603 204.

¶9

…Applicant(s)

¶10

Versus

¶11

1) Bharat M. Jain, Director,

¶12

Escapade Real Estate Pvt Ltd., 3. Ganapathy Colony, 3^rd Lane Off Cenotaph Road, Teynampet, Chennai -600018.

¶13

2) Ankur Gupta,

¶14

Jt. Managing Director, Ashiana Housing Ltd., Club house building, Govindapuram, SP Koil , Chengelpet Dist., Chennai – 603204.

¶15

3) The Member Secretary,

¶16

Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, 76, Mount Salai, Guindy, Chennai — 600 032.

¶17

4) The Chairman,

¶18

State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority, 3rd Floor, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet , Chennai — 600 015.

¶19

5) District Forest Officer,

¶20

RM9X+C54, Cheyyar - Kanchipuram Rd, Gem Nagar, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu 631 501.

¶21

...Respondent(s)

¶22

For Applicant(s): None.

¶23

For Respondent(s): Mr. T. Gowthaman, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. S. Muthuchharan for R2. Mr. S. Sai Sathya Jith for R3. Mr. G.M. Syed Nurullah Sheriff for R4. Dr. D. Shanmuganathan for R5 & R6.

¶24

Page 1 of 4

¶25

CORAM :

¶26

HON’BLE Smt. JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

¶27

HON’BLE Dr. SATYAGOPAL KORLAPATI, EXPERT MEMBER

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

1. This is an Original Application filed by one Mr. V. Rajagopalan for the following prayers:-

¶30

A. Direct the Respondents Authorities TN Pollution Control Board, State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority and District Forest office to inspect the project site and undertake detailed assessment of the present condition with respect to terms and conditions stipulated in Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate orders.

¶31

B. Direct the Respondents Authorities to engage an external consultant (like CUBE — IIT M) for technical audit of Sewage Treatment plant, current location of Gensets and solid waste handling / processing system.

¶32

C. Direct the Respondents Authorities to ensure the Respondents 1 and 2 strictly follow ―Zero Water Discharge‖ system as this being an eco sensitive area.

¶33

D. Direct the Respondents Authorities to ensure the Respondents 1 and 2 to implement recommendations given by IIT M to redesign/construct storm water drains and to construct water storage ponds to prevent flooding.

¶34

E. Direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to ensure the Respondents 1 & 2 for implementing solid waste storage, handling/processing system and for relocation of Gensets and transformers to the only open area that is presently available and kept reserved for development of the final Phase. 5 of Sr living apartment in this project.

¶35

F. Direct all the Respondents to keep the final Phase 5 of the project in abeyance until all the pollution abatement systems are successfully implemented.

¶36

G. Pass any other order as the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case.

¶37

2. He had appeared in person complaining that despite the sewage water being treated in the Sewage Treatment Plant (STP), the water is black in colour inside the residence which is used for flushing purposes.

¶38

3. The project proponent had earlier submitted that the water quality of the inlet and outlet is within the prescribed norms of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB). As it is an individual who is particularly the senior citizen to address this problem, we directed the TNPCB to go for a personal inspection, collect the water samples and furnish the test results.

¶39

Page 2 of 4

¶40

4. Accordingly, the TNPCB had filed its report dated 01.02.2024. The report mentions that the unit has provided STPs of capacities 100 KLD, 75 KLD and 75 KLD. The STPs are commonly installed for treating the sewage generated from the residential complex. The treated sewage is being utilized for gardening within the residential complex.

¶41

5. The report reads further that as per the Order of the Tribunal dated 08.09.2023 and subsequently based on the request made by the welfare association on 08.09.2023 regarding the operation of the STP and the operation of the DG set in the residential building, the unit site was inspected on 27.09.2023 and the letter was addressed to District Environmental Engineer (DEE), TNPCB to carry out the Ambient Air Quality Survey/stack emission and Noise level survey vide letter dated 13.10.2023. The sewage sample was collected from the Sewage Treatment Plant on 09.10.2023 and the result of the analysis reveals that the parameters are within the standard prescribed by the TNPCB. The unit has provided an Organic Waste Converter for handling the biodegradable waste.

¶42

6. The result of the analysis also shows that the samples have been taken both from the inlet and outlet and they are said to be within the permitted norms.

¶43

7. Incidentally, after filing this application, the applicant viz., Mr. V. Rajagopalan had alienated his property by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 24.01.2024 and he has also not appeared before us thereafter. As the matter was filed by the party-inperson and being a personal remedy having parted with the property, his claims in this application automatically will abate.

¶44

8. In the meanwhile, an interlocutory application [I.A. No.52 of 2024(SZ)] was filed by the Shubham Welfare Association (SRWA) to implead themselves as a party to this proceeding. It is surprising that the Association was a mute spectator all these days and never came before us. Only when the individual has filed this Original Application, who had also made allegations against the functioning of the Association, the above interlocutory application is filed.

¶45

Page 3 of 4

¶46

9. As the cause of action arose for filing this application is no longer available and the applicant seems to have sold the property, it would be appropriate to dispose of the Original Application.

¶47

10. In view of the same, the impleading application [I.A. No.52 of 2024(SZ)] is dismissed , as the grounds for impleading are not acceptable. It is to be noted that if the grounds mentioned for impleading the applicant in I.A. No.52 of 2024(SZ) has to be treated as an independent application, it would have been barred by limitation.

¶48

11. In the result, the Original Application [O.A. No.79 of 2023 (SZ)] is disposed of.

¶49

Sd/-
Smt. Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, JM
Sd/-
Dr. Satyagopal Korlapati, EM
O.A. No.79/2023(SZ) &
I.A. No.52/2024(SZ)
04 th April, 2024. AD.

¶50

Page 4 of 4

V Rajagopalan v. Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V Rajagopalan v. Escapade Real Estate Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

In Re 14 Cottah Mahisbathan Pond Turns Into Field Bmc Steps in Kolkata Wb vs Sate of West Bengal

Santoshpur Mitali Sangha vs State of West Bengal

Sukhbir Singh vs Union of India

Kotari Muralidhar Babu vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Fish Farmers Association Indapur vs Union of India

Pradeep Norula vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Pradeep Norula vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Pradeep Norula vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Tribunal on Its Own Motion Based Upon the News Crz Violations in Coastal Area of Vishakapatnam by Eenadu Published on 03RD March 2024 vs the District Collector Visakhapatnam

Kotari Muralidhar Babu vs State of Andhra Pradesh

A.Thiyagaraj vs Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

Misc Application in disposed of cases No. 6/2024 in Original Application No. 103/2024 of P Umapathy vs State of Tamilnadu Transport Department

R. Raju vs State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority - Tamil Nadu