National Investor Forum vs The Golden Forests (India ) Ltd
2013 Latest Caselaw 4513 Del

$~5
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                           Reserved on : 11.9.2013
                                           Decided on : 30 .9.2013


+     W.P.(C) NO.1399/2010

      NATIONAL INVESTOR FORUM           ..... Petitioner
                  Through : Mr.Harpawan Kumar Arora
                            with Mr.Prashant Chauhan and
                            Mr.Saurabh Suman Sinha,
                            Advocates for the
                            Committee/GFIL

                          Versus

      THE GOLDEN FORESTS (INDIA ) LTD. ..... Respondent

Through :

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

% MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

CM No.9656/2013

1. The application has been filed by the Committee/GFIL, seeking

the following reliefs:-

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 1

(i) to make an offer to the bidder M/s SAS Properties, No.105, Sector-6, Panchkula, on the lines of the order dated 14.06.2013 (Annexure A-3) read with previous order dated 27.2.2013 (Annexure A-1);

(ii) If this offer is acceptable to the bidder M/s. SAS Properties, aforesaid, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi is prayed that the order dated 11.8.2011 regarding confirmation of the sale may be modified accordingly.

or If this offer is not acceptable to the bidder M/s SAS Properties, aforesaid, the Hon'ble High Court is prayed to order cancellation of the sale;

(iii) pass an order which it deems just and proper in the interest of justice.

2. The Committee submits that the occasion for seeking the

aforesaid reliefs has arisen because certain lands which were not

intended to be sold in the auction formed a part of the details of

the property advertised, pursuant to which M/s SAS Properties

was confirmed as the highest bidder. The property known as

„Hotel & Resort at Village Billa, 10 km from Panchkula on

Narain Garh State Highway, 1 km inside main road, District

Panchkula (Haryana), Description: Incompletely constructed

Tourist Resort, Amusement Park, Hotel (60 rooms Approx.),

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 2 Lakes, Green Parks, Farm House, Golf Course (9 holes),

Swimming Pool and Water Chute, Area Approx. 1398 Kanal

and 3 Marla was advertised for sale by inviting sealed bids and

after the sealed bids were received and opened, the property was

put to sale by auction on 15.4.2011, on as-is, where-is-and

whatever-there-is-basis. The sale was confirmed by an order of

this Court dated 11th August, 2011 in CM No.9340-41/2011.

3. The offer of sale as per the advertisement was for 1398 Kanal

and 3 Marlas, however, at the time of drawing of certificate of

sale, an inspection of the lands was conducted by the

Committee and a site plan of the advertised and non-advertised

lands was prepared. It was found that some portions of the

buildings of an Engineering College and its hostel buildings and

lands appurtenant thereto had been inadvertently included in the

„sale details‟ purely on account of a clerical mistake, although,

these lands were never intended to be part of the sale. In fact,

the said lands measuring 21 Kanal 12 Marla being Khasra

Nos.52//2/2(1-8), 3(7-2), 8/1(3-10), 9/1/1 (2-9) and 26 (1-10);

46//21(0-16) and 52//1/1(0-13) and 2/1 (4-4) (known as

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 3 Farmhouse) was not included in the site plan of the parcel of

land on which the Resort was constructed and advertised for

sale.

4. It is further submitted by the counsel for the Committee,

Mr.Harpawan Kumar Arora, that non-contiguous lands that

were part of a College and were not part of the parcel of lands

and property offered for sale through advertisement

inadvertently found a way into „the details of the property‟

supplied to the bidder concerned. This anomaly was discovered

and duly considered in the order of the Committee dated 27 th

February, 2013. The Committee listed the reasons why the

lands mentioned in the details of the properties supplied to the

bidder/respondent could not be sold. It reasoned that lands

forming part of the Resort and in its vicinity had been clubbed

into different parcels so as to make them more viable and

attractive for sale. These marked as Part A, B and C. Certain

parcels of the lands forming a portion of Part-C had

inadvertently got included in the „details‟ which could not be

sold. However, to complete the sale, the Committee offered

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 4 1403 Kanal 15½ Marlas to the bidder and requested him to

deposit Rs.50,00,31,000/- plus Rs. 20,11,711/- towards the

proportionate price for the excess area of 5 Kanal 2½ Marlas.

The bidder declined the offer and indicated that it would accept

only certain lands as indicated by them in the letter dated 13th

March, 2013. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel

for the respondent bidder/company states that if the Committee

is unable to effect sale of the entire lands which they got in the

bid as per the details of property supplied to them, they would

not like to proceed with the transaction and accordingly the

monies paid towards sale consideration may be returned to them

with interest thereon along with the cost of stamp duty paid for

the aforesaid transaction. The learned counsel for the applicant

submits that it is not possible for the Committee to sell those

lands which were not intended to be sold nor formed part of the

advertisement. All-the-more-so, because the lands which were

advertised were about 1 km from the main road whereas certain

portions of the land which erroneously got included in the

"details of property" were merely 340 mtrs. from the road.

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 5 Both formed different parcels of roads and would have to

assessed separately. It is common knowledge and accepted

market practice that lands are evaluated primarily on the basis

of their location and distance from motorable roads and

highways. The parcel of land which was offered in the bid as

per the advertisement was assessed to have a reserved bid price

of Rs.50 crores. Those lands inadvertently got included in the

"details of the properties" supplied to the bidder belonged to a

different parcel of land which would be evaluated and sold off

separately. If the best located parts of the other parcels of land

are sold out or included in the present bid, it would adversely

affect the valuation of the remainder lands of Part-C.

5. In these circumstances, since the offer of the Committee of

1403 Kanal is not acceptable and the bidder - M/s SAS

Properties desires to have its bid cancelled and monies paid by

it returned to it, the application of the Committee is allowed to

the extent that the sale confirmed vide order dated 11 th August,

2011 is hereby cancelled. The Committee shall return the

monies deposited by M/s SAS Properties along with interest

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 6 earned thereon within a period of four weeks from today. The

bidder M/s SAS Properties will apply for refund of the Stamp

Duty with the Revenue Authorities in view of this order. It

would always be open to the parties to approach this Court in

the event of any difficulties in the working out of this order.

6. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. No order as

to costs.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J (JUDGE)

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J (JUDGE) SEPTEMBER 30 , 2013 RN

WP(C) No.1399/2010 Page 7