Top
News Updates

Managing A Construction Project Is Not Within The Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Of Customers Of A NOIDA Project

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
8 Jan 2021 5:16 AM GMT
Managing A Construction Project Is Not Within The Jurisdiction:  Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Of Customers Of A NOIDA Project
x

Managing a construction project is not within the jurisdiction of the court, the Supreme Court observed while declining to entertain a writ petition filed by 25 customers of a construction project.The petitioners sought a direction for the revival of the project or refund of the money, and a court monitored probe in the matter. Taking note of the prayers made, the bench headed by Justice...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

 Managing a construction project is not within the jurisdiction of the court, the Supreme Court observed while declining to entertain a writ petition filed by 25 customers of a construction project.

The petitioners sought a direction for the revival of the project or refund of the money, and a court monitored probe in the matter. Taking note of the prayers made, the bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud observed:

"Essentially, the writ petition requires the Court to step into the construction project and to ensure that it is duly completed. This would be beyond the remit and competence of the Court under Article 32. Managing a construction project is not within the jurisdiction of the court."

The court observed that several provisions of law confer statutory rights on purchasers of real estate and invest them with remedies enforceable at law. "These include the Consumer Protection Act 1986, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016. Parliament has enacted a statutory regime to protect the rights of purchasers of real estate and created fora which are entrusted with decision making authority", the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and Sanjeev Khanna added. While dismissing the plea, the bench further observed:

"A decision of a public authority which is entrusted with a public duty is amenable to judicial review. But it is quite another hypothesis to postulate that the decision making authority should be taken over by the court. The latter is impermissible. It would be inappropriate for this Court to assume the jurisdiction to supervise the due completion of a construction project especially in facts such as those presented in the present case. This will inevitably draw the court into the day to day supervision of the project, including financing, permissions and execution something which lies beyond the ken of judicial review and the competence of the court. The court must confine itself to its core competencies which consist in the adjudication of disputes amenable to the application of legal standards."


CASE: SHELLY LAL vs. UNION OF INDIA [Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s).1390/2020]
CORAM: Justices DY Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee and Sanjeev Khanna
COUNSEL: Adv Shikhil Suri, AOR Shiv Kumar Suri
CITATION: LL 2021 SC 10

Click here to Read/Download Order

Read Order



Next Story
Share it