HC denies JAL's interim plea to sell land and clear dues

The esteemed Allahabad High Court has delivered its verdict on JAL's petition for a one-year extension to sell a significant 150-acre land parcel in the esteemed Special Development Zone (SDZ) 'core area' of Sector 25. The primary objective was to liquidate the substantial outstanding land dues owed to the esteemed Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (YEIDA), which amounted to a staggering sum exceeding Rs 3,600 crore. Regrettably, the court found that the land allotment had been rightfully rescinded by the esteemed Authority back in February 2020. Consequently, the court, in its wisdom, declined to extend interim protection to the petitioner, JAL, preventing any dealings or sale of the disputed property. Granting such relief would have amounted to annulling the cancellation of an allotment, a course of action the court deemed inappropriate at this stage.

The honourable bench, comprised of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh, diligently presided over the case filed by JAL in opposition to YEIDA's order of February 12, 2020, which cancelled the allotment of a staggering 1,000 hectares intended for a sports City development off the illustrious Yamuna Expressway in Sector 25. Anticipating the case's final verdict in August, the court further observed that previous attempts to find an amicable settlement between YEIDA and JAL had regrettably failed, making it necessary to issue a definitive ruling at this juncture. JAL has fervently approached the High Court and sought interim relief while expressing their willingness to settle the Rs 3,621 crore dues flagged by YEIDA. The developer even presented a comprehensive resolution plan to fulfil ongoing residential projects.

However, the dispute between YEIDA and JAL concerning the unpaid land dues pertaining to the revoked land allotment has remained contentious. YEIDA contends that JAL owes a staggering Rs 3,621 crore, whereas the developer firmly asserts the outstanding sum to be around Rs 1,500 crore, creating a significant difference in their perspectives. During the July 13 hearing, JAL's legal counsel fervently sought interim protection, including a stay on the cancellation of allotments. This, they argued, would enable JAL to dispose of certain portions of the leased land, thereby generating funds to meet both undisputed and disputed YEIDA demands. The objective was to generate revenue crucial for completing the expansive residential projects for which JAL had been granted a vast tract of land.

In a conciliatory gesture, JAL's counsel offered to deposit a reasonable sum during the pendency of the petition, showcasing their earnestness to cooperate with YEIDA. However, the esteemed Authority staunchly rejected the proposal, standing firm on its demand for JAL to pay 10 percent of the total dues to reinstate the allotment. Ultimately, the court acknowledged the predicament faced by homebuyers, whose interests were adversely affected by the petition. While an order of status quo was granted, allowing JAL to retain possession over the allotted land, this protection inadvertently jeopardized the interests of the homebuyers. The interim order operated to their grave prejudice, a consequence the court recognized with due concern.

Next (RLDA seeks bids for leasing Agra's Belanganj railway land)

HC denies JAL's interim plea to sell land and clear dues

This Month

Overview

Explore

Join Us