SUPERTECH LIMITED versus EMERALD COURT OWNER RESIDENT WELFARE ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS

Citation: [2021] 10 S.C.R. 569 · Decided: 04-10-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, B.V. NAGARATHNA · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
569
[2021] 10 S.C.R. 569
569
SUPERTECH LIMITED
v.
EMERALD COURT OWNER RESIDENT WELFARE
ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS
(Miscellaneous Application No. 1572 of 2021)
In
(Civil Appeal No. 5041 of 2021)
OCTOBER 04, 2021
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND
B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Judgment – Modification of – Applicant sought modification
of the judgment and order of the Supreme Court dated 31.08.2021
– Earlier, the Division Bench of the High Court had directed the
demolition of Towers 16 and 17 by NOIDA constructed by the
applicant – The Judgment of the High Court was affirmed by the
Supreme Court – Applicant submitted that since the minimum distance
required under the relevant Building Regulations was not complied
with and there was violation of the requirement of maintaining a
green area under the relevant Building Regulations – The applicant
would meet the above two findings by slicing a portion of Tower
17, while retaining Tower 16 so as to ensure compliance of the
above two findings – Held: The attempt in the present miscellaneous
application was to seek a substantive modification of the Judgment
of the Supreme Court – Such an attempt is not permissible in a
miscellaneous application – Application u/Or.LV, Rule 6 of the
Supreme Court Rules, 2013 cannot be inverted to bypass the
provisions of review in Or.XLVII in the Rules 2013 – The
miscellaneous application is an abuse of the process – A judicial
pronouncement cannot be subject to modification once the judgment
has been pronounced, by filing miscellaneous application – Thus,
the miscellaneous application is accordingly dismissed.
Delhi Administration vs Gurdip Singh Uban and Others
(2000) 7 SCC 296 : [2000] 2 Suppl. SCR 496; Ram
Chandra Singh vs Savitri Devi and Others (2004) 12
SCC 713 : [2004] 12 SCR 713 – relied on.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
570
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 10 S.C.R.
Supertech Limited vs Emerald Court Owner Resident
Welfare Association and Other (2021) SCC Online SC
648; Vijay Kurle and Others (2020) SCC Online SC
711; Meghmala vs G Narasimha Reddy (2010) 8 SCC
383 : [2010] 10 SCR 47; Parbhani Transport Co-
operative Society Ltd. vs The Regional Transport
Authority, Aurangabad & Others AIR (1960) SC 801 :
[1960] SCR 177 - referred to.
Nazir Ahmed vs King Emperor (1936) L.R. 63 IndAp
372 – referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2000] 2 Suppl. SCR 496
relied on
Para 5
[2004] 12 SCR 713
relied on
Para 5
[2010] 10 SCR 47
referred to
Para 12
[1960] SCR 177
referred to
Para 13
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Miscellaneous Application
No.1572 of 2021.
In
Civil Appeal No.5041 of 2021.
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.04.2014 of the High Court
of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition (Civil) No.65085 of 2012.
Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Adv., Mahesh Agarwal, Anshuman Srivastava,
Rishabh Parikh, E. C. Agrawala, Advs. for the Appellant.
Jayant Bhushan, Ravindra Raizada, Sr. Advs., Anish Agarwal,
Ms. Vanshika Gupta, Ms. Meenakshi Garg, Ketan Paul, Tushar Bhushan,
Amartya Bhushan, Bhakti Vardhan Singh, Ravindra Kumar, Ravi Prakash
Mehrotra, Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Ashiwan Mishra, Kamlendra Mishra,
Tarun Gupta, Ms. Prachi Mishra, Chaitanya Bansal, Tushar Bathija, Arjun
Garg, Advs. for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was passed :
ORDER
1. A miscellaneous application has been filed by Supertech Limited
seeking modification of the judgment and order of this Court dated 31
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
571
August 2021. The reliefs which are sought in the Miscellaneous
Application read thus:
“(a)
Modify the Judgment dated 31.08.2021…to the extent that
the Applicant may demolish a part of tower T-17 as stipulated
in paragraph 6 hereinabove;
(b)
Pass an order of status quo in respect of Towers 16 & 17
in Emerald Court, Plot No. 4, Sector 93A, NOIDA till final
orders are passed in the present application.”
2. A Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
directed the demolition of Towers 16 and 17 by the third respondent,
New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, in Emerald Court
constructed by the applicant and situated on Plot No 4, Sector 93A,
NOIDA. While affirming the judgment of the Division Bench, this Court
has recorded the following conclusions in its judgment, which is reported
as Supertech Limited vs Emerald Court Owner Resident Welfare
Association and Others1:
“185. To summarize our findings, the documentary materials
referred to and analyzed in this judgment indicate that:
(i)
The land allotted to appellant under the original lease
agreement and the su
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.