COUNTRY COLONISERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application CM-15060 of 2021 has been filed for directing the petitioner-company to place on record copies of the Income Tax returns/balance sheets of the petitioner-company.

(2.) Upon issuance of notice, the respondents were duly served and written responses were filed. The counsel for the allottees/private respondents objected to the petition and the relief prayed for on various counts. In the written statement filed by private respondents, various objections were raised including an objection that there is no tangible material to demonstrate any hardship as would justify any relaxation of the statutory condition enshrined under Sec. 43(5) of the RERA Act, 2016. The relevant objection as taken in Para Nos.2, 3, 9 and 10 of the preliminary submission as extracted as under:

(3.) That the present Civil Writ Petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as the Petitioner has not placed on record any documents and nor has pleaded any facts that could establish that the present civil writ petition has been filed by them due to EXTREME HARDSHIP being faced by them and how the deposit of amount is Onerous. That on a bare perusal of the entire Civil Writ Petition, not even a single instance could be found out wherein the petitioner has pleaded and shown any hardship what to talk of the Extreme Hardship to the petitioner company. That further it is appropriate to mention here that the Respondents No.4, No.5 and No.6 have paid a sum of Rs.1,33,93,761.00 to the Petitioner since purchase of the unit in year 2013 and thus out of the amount of Rs.2,25,00,000.00 mentioned by petitioner (without annexing any document to show that how amount of Rs.2,25,00,000.00 has been claimed by petitioner), a sum of Rs.1,33,93,761.00 has been paid by Respondents no.4, 5 and 6 and further the answering respondents are being burdened with payment of Installments to the HDFC Bank/Financial Institution from which they have availed home loan of Rs.97,00,000.00. That even after order of refund has been passed by the Hon'ble Adjudicating Officer, the Petitioner is harassing the answering respondents by filing frivolous litigation and prolonging the matter. That the petitioner has already delayed the proceedings before RERA and the matter which was filed in year 2019 has been delayed by petitioner and order could be passed only in year 2021. 9. That it is respectfully prayed that the Petitioner be directed to place on record the balance sheet/income tax returns filed by it in last three years and also to place on record the sales made by it in last three years and money collected from sales in last three years. That, it is not out of place to mention here that the petitioner company has increased the prices of all of its apartments/plots/floors in last few years and have collected huge amounts. That even a bare perusal of partial Occupation certificate annexed by Petitioner (annexure P-1 and P-2) would show that it had sold 174+204 apartments ie Total 378 apartments in 8 of its towers and prices of these apartments vary from 40 lakhs to Two crores of rupees and thus the petitioners have collected huge amount, in crores, by way of sales of units and in addition to that the petitioner company has sold plots, villas, Independent Floors and many commercial shops, show rooms, Hospital sites, school sites etc at their projects also. That after collecting hundreds of crores of rupees, the Petitioner company could not be allowed the concession of waiver of deposit of amount for filing of filling before appellate tribunal, as it has failed to show how the deposit of amount would be onerous or cause extreme hardship to it and thus the present Civil writ Petition deserves to be dismissed, after calling for records of sales and amount collected in last three years by petitioner company. 10. That a perusal of order dtd. 26/7/2021, passed in the present Civil Writ Petition, reveals that the petitioner has confined the scope of present petition with regard to reducing the condition of pre-deposit as per mandate under Sec. 43(5) of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, so as to prefer an appeal against the order dtd. 15/4/2021, so the answering respondents are also limiting their arguments/averments qua the waiver of pre condition of deposit and as to how such conditions are onerous as claimed in the present writ petition, without adverting much about the facts and other points involved in the matter. That the relief of waiver cannot be granted to the petitioner as this would result in encouraging the unscrupulous builders to further harass the allottes, against the mandate of Act. That the Petitioner company has already delayed the possession inordinately, did not develop the project as promised and are presently harassing the Answering respondents by delaying the legal proceedings and now the petitioner is seeking waiver from deposit of amount and this practice would lead to a dangerous trend wherein all builders/developers would be approaching this Hon'ble High Court for waiver of amount without showing anything substantial as to how the deposit of amount is Onerous or is extreme hardship to them. Thus the present civil Writ Petition. deserves to be dismissed and no relief shall be granted to petitioner herein as the present case not an exceptional one involving genuine hardship and only. That Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Hardevi Asnani vs State of Rajasthan and others (2011) 14 SCC 160 has held that High Court can entertain a petition permitting by passing of the remedy of appeal requiring pre-deposit only after examining and satisfying itself that the demand is exorbitant, so as to call for interference under Article 226 of constitution. That the present Civil Writ Petition does not come within definition of exorbitant demand or exceptional one involving genuine hardship and nothing has been placed on record by the petitioner as to be examined by this Hon'ble Court as to involving genuine hardship or extreme hardship to Petitioner and merely by relying upon CWP 17133 of 2020 no relief can be granted to petitioner and the petitioner company has to stand on its own legs and make out its own case, which it has failed to do and the present CWP deserves to be dismissed." 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner was confronted with the aforesaid preliminary objection taken in the written statement by the private respondents during the resumed hearing on 23/11/2021 and the following order was passed: