Allahabad High Court
Contend Builders Private Limited vs New Okhla Industrial Development ... on 29 July, 2025
Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:125979-DB
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21586 of 2025
Petitioner :- Contend Builders Private Limited
Respondent :- New Okhla Industrial Development Authority And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram M. Kaushik
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh,Mohd. Afzal
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Sri Navin Sinha and Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Counsels assisted by Sri Ram M. Kaushik, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kaushlendra Nath Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.1, New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, Sri Ambrish Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Mohd. Afzal, learned counsel for respondent no.3, U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority.
2. An identical matter earlier came up before this Court (by a similarly situated builder) being Writ-C No.27553 of 2022 (M/S Augar Realtors Private Limited Vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) in which the Division Bench of this Court had passed a detailed judgement on 24.02.2025. The relevant paragraphs of the judgement dated 24.02.2025 are reproduced as under:-
"A group of companies in a consortium headed by one M/s Logix Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. participated in the bidding process for the Sports City SC-01/150 in Sector-150, Noida. Once its bid was found to be most compliant it was declared as the successful bidder and was allotted the project for the development of Sports City (SC-01) in Sector 150 on a plot area of 8,00,000 square meters on 04.05.2011.
M/s Logix Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd, lead member of the consortium, wrote to the NOIDA Authority on 28.12.2011 seeking permission for the sub-division of plot in Sector 150 into two parts. The request was accepted by the Noida Authority on 17.01.2012 and the plot was divided into two parts. One plot being SC-1/A admeasuring 2,69,430 square meters was allotted to M/s Logix Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd and the other Plot No.SC-1/B admeasuring 2,78,761.8431 square meters was retained by M/s Logix Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd.
The allotment and the shareholding of the consortium was as follows:-
Sport City: Plot No. SC-01 Sector-150
Name of Allottee
M/s. Logix Infradevelopers Pvt. Ltd. (Consortium)
Alloted Area
80,00,000 SqMtr.
Rate of Allotment
Rs. 12,050 (Per Square Meter)
Date of Allotment
04-05-2011
The sub-division of the Sports City SC-01/150 was as follows:-
Details of Sub-divisions in the ares allotted to the Consortium are being enumerated below:
S.NO.
PROPERTY NO. / Area (in sqmt)
Name of Allottee
Date of Lease/
Sublease
SC-01/A/150-5188.6 sqmt
M/S LOGIX BUILDER & PROMOTERS PVT.LTD.
17.1.2012
SC-01/A-1/150 93072 sqmt
M/S ASSERTIVE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD. (100% Subsidiary Company)
9.4.2013
SC-01/A-2/150-28,336.30 sqmt
NEO INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD (100% Subsidiary Company)
15.4.2013
SC-01/A-3/150
28326.3 sqmt
M/S LOGIX HEIGHTS PVT. LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
15.4.2013
SC-01/A-4/150
56652.00 sqmt
M/S ESTHETICS BUILDTECH PVT LTD.
(IOO% subsidiary company)
15.4.2013
SC-01/A-5/150
7,650.00 sqmt
Transferred through
M/S Logix Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd in favour of
M/S ACE INFRACITI' DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. On 27.8.2013
10.9.2013
SC-01/A-6/150
34814.3 sqmt
M/S INVENTIVE INFRACON PVT. LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
21.5.2014
SC-01/B/150 40880.51 sqmt
M/S LOGIX INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.
17.1.2012
SC-01/B-1/150
32372.9 sqmt
M/S CONTEND BUILDERS PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-01/B-2/150
80932.2 sqmt
M/S CONTEND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
03.05.2013
SC-01/B-3/150
20333.1 sqmt
M/S CONSORTIUM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-0l/B-4/150
29545.8 sqmt
M/S IMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-01/B-5/150 24280 sqmt
M/S ABOUND INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-01/B-6/150 17600 sqmt
M/S APACE BUILTECH PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-01/B-7/150 17600 sqmt
M/S IMPEL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
3.5.2013
SC-01/B-8/150
45,603.64 sqmt
M/S ACE INFRACITY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.
16.4.2014
SC-01/C/150
18000 sqmt
LOGIX INFRADEVELOPERS PVT LTD
28.3.2014
SC-01/CA-1/150 80937.13 sqmt
M/S NOBILTY ESTATES PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
21.5.2014
SC-01/C,C-A2
CA4,CA6/150
12000.00 Sqmt
M/S CELERITY INFRA PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
SC-01/CA-3/150 13,356 sqmt
M/S EXPLICIT ESTATES PVT. LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
8.7.2014
SC-01/CA-5/150 20,000 sqmt
M/S AUGUR REALTORS PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
8.7.2014
SC-01/CA-7/150
13,000.00 sqmt
M/S ELICIT REALTECH PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
7.6.2014
SC-01/CA-8/150
12,000.00 sqmt
M/S ABET BUILDCON PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
7.6.2014
SC-01/CA-9/150
44515.42 sqmt
M/S ARISING ESTATES PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
21.5.2014
SC-01/CA-10/150
16,000.00 sqmt
M/S HALE REALTORS PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
8.7.2014
SC-01/CA-11/150
22,400.84 sqmt
M/S CELERITY INFRASTRUCTURE PW.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
7.6.2014
SC-01/CA-12/150
55300.97 sqmt
M/S CELERITY INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD.
(100% Subsidiary Company)
11.9.2015
(Emphasis Supplied)
The subsidiary has got the sub-lease deed registered and incorporated clauses to be bound by the original terms of the lease. Therefore, the subsidiaries are bound by the original terms and conditions as mentioned in the lease deed of the relevant member or the lead member.
The sub-leases in favour of the subsidiaries contained the obligation to develop the Sports City Project and there are clear stipulations in the sub-lease deed to that effect. The subsidiaries have even indemnified the authority through sub-lease deed against non-completion of the project.
The subsidiary company is bound not only by its sub-lease but is also bound by the terms of the original lease and, therefore, it is under the same obligation as the Consortium and becomes a part of the chain to develop Sports City Project in the same proportion as has been fixed in the brochure, allotment letter and the principal lease deed.
These conditions were also openly flouted and not followed. Though the lessee was permitted to transfer only the built-up space on the condition that full payment of the plot premium along with interest thereon and also the payment of the up-to-date lease rent but in the instant case, instead of the transfer of the built up area, the open area marked for recreation, was also transferred without paying the dues (premium and lease rent). The transfer was supposed to be affected subject to completion of the project and after obtaining the building completion certificate from NOIDA, but here the transfer was made much prior to the construction having been started. The lessee/sub-lessees did not follow the mandatory conditions of the allotment and lease deed, which was to be followed prior to the transfer. Though non-payment of dues immediately calls for cancellation of the project, but the same was not done.
In the instant case, the consortium was allotted the sports city project. However, instead of developing the sports city project they have chosen to divide the entire sports city into smaller plots and then sold it off to various other companies. The original allottees, who have only paid 10% of the total allotment amount and thereafter, chose to pay pittance and did not pay any further dues, taking advantage of the increase of the value of land over a period of time, has sold it off to the other builders at a very high premium. The fraud mechanism was put into motion by transferring the share and changing the Directors and shareholding of the subsidiary companies, though this was not the object of the scheme to allow sub-division of the plots and to sell it off to other entities, who were not even eligible to apply for the sports city. Hence, it transpires that the original allotee right from the inception had no intention of developing the project and was only interested in making money by selling the companies incorporated by the promoters.
The division, sub division of sports city was a part of the nefarious design of the developers/promoters. Their intention, right from the day one, was not to develop the Sports City but to sub-divide the entire Sport City into plots and sell them off at a high price for their personal benefits. The mens rea of these promoters and directors of the Consortium Members of the company was writ large.
The main plank of argument of NOIDA Authority was that sports city was an integrated project and has to be developed as one by all the consortium members to whom the project was allotted. If the allottees had managed to illegally get some sub lease executed or got a map sanctioned and divide the integrated project illegally, then allottes cannot seek benefit of such an illegal act which was an outcome of connivance of the Builders and the officials of the NOIDA Authority.
After the allotment of the project, time and again the condition in the Brochure and the scheme were breached by the allotees/ sub-leassees, in connivance with the officers of the NOIDA Authority. However, no explanation was called from the concerned officers of NOIDA Authority nor any action was taken against them.
What is more shocking is that even after CAG pointed out in its report regarding the scam and fraud played by the builder and connivance of the officer of NOIDA Authority, no remedial measures has been taken by the NOIDA Authority and the State Government against such delinquent officials till date.
In this case, the officers of the NOIDA Authority have failed to demand the outstanding dues, only few letters were sent in last so many years asking for the outstanding dues. The allotees are enjoying the project, and not paying the outstanding dues, It is quite apparent that the officers of the NOIDA Authority are hand in gloves with the builders/developers and have extended undue favour to them by not asking them to pay the outstanding dues and neither had taken any penal action against them for the default. On the other hand, they have allowed the builders to collect money from the home buyers and start construction without even completing the contractual obligations of developing the Sports City first.
A comprehensive and inclusive analysis of the present situation reveals that a bunch of allottees got the project allotted, after paying a small amount of the land premium. Thereafter, instead of discharging their obligation towards integrated development of the Project, a set of individuals, who were effectively behind all the members of the Consortium, only focussed on residential development and completely ignored their responsibility for the development of sports facilities. They have divided the entire project land, and have sold off or are trying to sell the land to entities, which were not even eligible to even participate in the tender process.
The instant case is a clear case of fraud played by the promoters of the consortium companies, wherein they have cheated the NOIDA Authority, by not paying its dues, by getting the sub division done, and getting the map sanctioned contrary to the conditions of the scheme and brochure conditions of the sports city. All this has been done in connivance of the officials of the NOIDA Authority, hence prima-facie a case is made out for committing criminal conspiracy with an intention of doing fraud and cheating.
In this case, as far as the homebuyers are concerned, they are the worst affected individuals. They had booked their flats investing their lifetime savings/or have taken a bank loan with a dream that one day they will have a roof on their head. Since the maps were duly approved by NOIDA Authority, they had no reasons to suspect a foul play and they fell in the trap. After paying the entire cost of the flat, the completion and bankable title is still a mirage.
CONCLUSIONS & DIRECTIONS
Since very senior officers of the NOIDA Authority, State, and other influential persons seems to be involved and because of them no inquiry has yet been conducted for this reason, the Court does not inspire any confidence in referring the matter for investigation to any of the State agencies, hence, this is a fit case where the inquiry should be instituted by the Central Bureau of Investigation1.
We, therefore, direct the CBI to thoroughly investigate against all the stakeholders regarding the entire affairs of the allotment and development of the sports city SC- 01 sector 150.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of plight of homebuyers, the sub-lessees/allottees, who have taken the project to immediately complete the project on their own. Firstly, they have to develop the sports facilities proportionately and, thereafter, they will start the construction of the residential apartments, strictly as per the terms of the Brochure of the Sports City & the lease deed.
We make it clear that the petitioner company would not take any further booking and create any third party rights in the said project before completing the sports facilitates. After completing the sports facilities the petitioner company would be allowed to proceed further with the construction and selling of the residential facilities in consonance with the scheme.
The NOIDA Authority is directed to raise a fresh demand on all the lease holders according to the contract including the interest and penal interest and other dues which are outstanding as on date. Thereafter, further three months time shall be granted to the allottes/sub-allottees to pay the same.
Needless to say that in case, the petitioner company deposits the dues of the NOIDA Authority and undertakes steps to complete the project, as per the norms of the sports city scheme, then only after completing the sports facilities, which were assigned in its share, the petitioner company can apply for the occupancy certificates of the residential/ commercial block built by the petitioner. If the allottees are unable to develop the project, then they can surrender the land back to the Noida Authority as provided in the scheme /brochure but certainly they will not be allowed to sell the project/ company/ land or transfer in any manner to any third party.
In that case, the forfeited amount along with bank rate of interest would be paid to the genuine home buyers, who have made investment in the projects.
In that eventuality, the NOIDA Authority is not going to suffer any loss as it would be open for the NOIDA Authority to re-advertise the plots at the current market rate, and undoubtedly, the NOIDA Authority will fetch far much more (from the forfeited amount and the fresh allotment) even after paying back the homebuyers their principal and interest on their deposit.
The development of the sports city has to be carried out strictly as per the scheme and the brochure, and the terms of the allotment letter and the lease deed. We direct that the CEO of NOIDA Authority would personally monitor the implementation of the sports facilities and the development of the sports city in toto.
With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed off."
(Emphasis Supplied)
3. The judgement dated 24.02.2025 has been assailed before Hon'ble the Supreme Court by means of Special Leave Petition No.6234 of 2025 (M/S Logix Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. & Others), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 21.03.2025 has passed the following order:-
"Permission to file SLP is granted in SLP (C) Diary No.14607 of 2025.
Applications for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and official translation and for permission to file lengthy list of dates are also allowed.
Issue notice in SLP (C) Diary No.13855/2025 and SLP (C) Diary No.14607/2005.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent (s) accepts notice in SLP (C) Diary No.13855/2025 and SLP (C) Diary No.14607/2025.
With respect to criminal proceedings, the respondent authorities may proceed in pursuance of the impugned judgement. However, no coercive action shall be taken.
We make it clear that we are not staying any other proceedings."
4. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking grant of occupancy certificate, re-assessment of dues and to execute the requisite deeds. For ready reference, the reliefs claimed in the instant writ petition are reproduced as under:-
"a) Stay the effect/opetation of impugned Demand Notice dated 02.05.2025 by NOIDA (received by the petitioner on 09.05.2025) raising purported incorrect, exorbitant and illegal demands from the petitioner.
b) Direct respondent no.1 to forthwith grant a part/provisional Occupancy Certificate in respect of Antara Noida Phase-1, during the pendency of the application dated 28.01.2025 made by the petitioner for grant of Occupancy Certificate, and or, during the pendency of the present Writ Petition to enable the petitioner to offer possession of units to the Homebuyers.
c) Direct respondent no.1 to execute and register the requisite deeds/instruments, etc as may be necessary for the handing over of possession or units by the petitioner to the Homebuyer;
d) Direct respondent no.3 to extend the approvals/registration beyond 16.06.2025, till the receipt of the Occupancy Certificate or such further period as may be required and to permit continued operation of the Project's RERA-designated bank account beyond 16.05.2025 during the pendency of the present Writ Petition.
e) Direct respondent no.1 and 3 to suspend the applicability of any delay penalties linked to any delay in handover of possession to the homebuyers, during the pendency of the present Writ Petition' and direct respondents to maintain status quo and not take any coercive steps against the petitioner during the pendency of the present Writ Petition;
f) Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity."
5. The relief sought in the instant writ petition are dependent upon the petitioner complying with the directions issued by this Court in Writ-C No.27553 of 2022.
6. In pursuance of the directions issued by Division Bench in Writ-C No.27553 of 2022, the Noida Authority has issued a letter dated 21.07.2025, which is placed on record. The contents of letter dated 21.07.2025 are reproduced hereunder :-
विषय- वाणिज्यिक स्पोर्टस सिटी भूखण्ड संख्या-एस०सी०-01/बी-1, सेक्टर-150, नोएडा के सम्बन्ध में।
महोदय,
कृपया आपके साथ दूरभाष पर हुई वार्ता के क्रम में उपरोक्त भूखण्ड के विरूद्ध दिनांक 30.6.2025 तक मदवार देयता निम्नानुसार है-
Plot No.
SC-01, Sector-160
Area
32372.9 Sqm
Name of Sub Lessee
M/s contend Builder Pvt. Ltd.
Date of Lease Deed
17.1.2012
Date of Sub Lease Deed
3.5.2013
LAND PREMIUM DUE (UPTO 30.6.2025)
1,39,80,06,530.00
ADD. COMPENSATION AMOUNT
6,18,55,881.30
LEASE RENT DUE
3,28,47,356.70
TIME EXTENSION AMOUNT (UPTO 30.6.2025)
28,28,17,748.00
TOTAL DUE (30.6.2025)
1,7,55,22,516.00
उपरोक्त गणना में समयवृद्धि शुल्क की गणना हेतु अवगत कराना है कि आवंटी द्वारा दिनांक 28.8.2019 को भूखण्ड के विरूद्ध देयताओं के पुननिर्धारण हेतु अनुरोध किया गया। जिसके क्रम में तत्समय देय दिनांक 17.1.2019 से 16.1.2020 तक समयवृद्धि शुल्क की मद में रू०-1,95,04,673.00 से आवंटी को अवगत कराया गया। जिसके क्रम में आवंटी द्वारा देयताओं के पुनर्निधारण के वर्ष 2019 में समयवृद्धि शुल्क की मद तत्समय देय धनराशि का भुगतान किया गया। उक्त अवधि के उपरान्त से अभी तक आवंटी/उप पट्टाधारी द्वारा समयवृद्धि शुल्क की मद में किसी भी देयता का भुगतान नहीं किया गया है उपरोक्त तालिका में उल्लिखित समयवृद्धि शुल्क आवंटी द्वारा भुगतान की गई धनराशि के समायोजनोपरान्त एवं कोविड महामारी के दृष्टिगत जारी आदेशों के अन्तर्गत एक वर्ष का निःशुल्क समयवृद्धि शुल्क का लाभ दिये जाने के उपरान्त की जा रही है।
उपरोक्त के अतिरिक्त किश्तों/भू-भाटक/64.7 प्रतिशत अतिरिक्त प्रतिकर की देयता प्राधिकरण के वित्त विभाग द्वारा उपलब्ध करायी गयी गणना के आधार पर प्रेषित की जा रही है।
7. The letter dated 21.07.2025 has also been assailed in this writ petition.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
9. A bare perusal of the impugned demand notice shows that the same has been issued as per the earlier directions given in Writ-C No.27553 of 2022.
10. We find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned demand notice issued by the Noida Authority as the same has been issued in terms of the earlier order dated 24.02.2025.
11. The order dated 24.02.2025 still stands good as the same has not been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, as per the earlier directions, the petitioner is granted three months time to pay as per the demand and also to complete the sports facilities in terms of the scheme and brochure of the allotment letter and the lease-deed.
12.The instant writ petition is devoid of any merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.7.2025
S.P./Bhanu
(Prashant Kumar,J) (M. C. Tripathi,J)
