Art Nirman Ltd, tasked with redeveloping Nidhi Apartments in Shastrinagar, Ahmedabad, faces legal challenges as a dissenter files an FIR against three partners. The company, having obtained over 75% consent from the society, began demolition. However, a member, Chandrakant Shah, objected to the redevelopment due to the inclusion of commercial units. Despite a civil court dismissing his protest, Shah filed an FIR, accusing the builders of causing Rs 1.75 crore damage by demolishing his house without proper notice. The partners argue compliance with the tripartite agreement. The Gujarat high court is set to adjudicate on the matter.
Art Nirman Ltd finds itself entangled in a legal quagmire in Ahmedabad, where three of its partners have sought refuge in the Gujarat High Court. Accused of trespassing and property damage during the demolition of a building in Shastrinagar as part of a redevelopment initiative, the partners—Anil Thakkar, Jignesh Chauhan, and Dipak Parmar—are facing serious allegations.
The genesis of this legal tussle lies in Art Nirman Ltd winning a tender to redevelop a section of Nidhi Apartments in Shastrinagar. The endeavour gained momentum when more than 75% of the society's members consented to the redevelopment plan, setting the stage for a comprehensive transformation.
A tripartite agreement was forged, involving the construction company, the Gujarat Housing Board (GHB), and the housing society. The crux of this pact stipulated that the builder would deliver residences 140% of the existing size after completing construction within a three-year timeframe. In adherence to the agreement, GHB issued notices, prompting members to vacate their homes.
However, as the demolition of the building commenced, dissent reared its head in the form of Chandrakant Shah, a member of the housing society. Shah approached the police and a civil court, registering his protest against the redevelopment scheme. His objection stemmed from the inclusion of commercial units in the new plan, a departure from the original residential focus.
Despite Shah's efforts, the civil court sided with the builder, dismissing his protest. Undeterred, Shah escalated the matter by filing a First Information Report (FIR) against the three partners of Art Nirman Ltd on July 29. The accusation lodged with Naranpura police contended that the demolition occurred without prior intimation to vacate the property, either from the Gujarat Housing Board or the builder. Shah claimed damages amounting to Rs 1.75 crore, citing that his furniture remained in the house during the demolition.
Feeling threatened by the builders' persistence and the ongoing demolition, Shah's family pre-emptively relocated to his son's house a month before filing the FIR. The charges against the three partners include Sections 427, 447, 507, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), covering damaging property, criminal trespass, criminal intimidation, and abetment.
In response, the accused builders approached the Gujarat High Court through their advocate, Apurva Kapadia. They argued that the demolition adhered to the terms of the tripartite agreement, asserting that they should not be held accountable by law enforcement.
The forthcoming legal battle is poised to unfold in the Gujarat High Court, where the partners of Art Nirman Ltd will seek a fair hearing and present their case in defence of the redevelopment actions taken. The case encapsulates the intricate dynamics between property redevelopment, dissenting voices within housing societies, and the legal intricacies surrounding adherence to agreements. The court's decision will likely set a precedent for similar cases in the realm of construction and redevelopment disputes.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
