The Supreme Court ruled that homebuyers in the city of Maradu who bought apartments that were later demolished for violating environmental standards were equally liable as builders and authorities.
A bench of justice BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna said that people who buy apartments are not illiterate and should think more about where they spend their hard-earned money.
“What are the responsibilities of a homebuyer? Can I buy somewhere just because a contractor is building it? . They are neither rednecks nor illiterate,” said Justice Nagalatna.
The comments came after a homebuyer submitted a complaint about the difficulties they faced following the court order that led to the demolition of their flats.
The Supreme Court has heard petitions from people who have purchased apartments in Maradu Township, Kerala. These apartments were built in a designated Coastal Regulatory Zone (CRZ) in the area and were ordered to be removed in May 2019.
A review petition was later filed against this judgment by a builder of one of the apartment buildings arguing that it was based on a misunderstanding that a building actually constructed in accordance with CRZ III was constructed in an area reported as CRZ III. I have submitted a claim. CRZ standard.
However, in September 2019, the Supreme Court ordered the Government of Kerala that to pay 725 lakh as interim compensation to the affected flat owners, which were to be recovered from the builders and the remainder to be awarded to the flat owners to be evaluated by the Justice TB Radhakrishnan committee.
The Court later ordered the builder to deposit 720 crore with the Committee. According to the committee’s report filed with the Supreme Court, Panchayat officials issued a building permit and later failed to issue any stop memo to the builders.
The Committee noted that, according to the relevant notice, the area of the building that is currently being demolished has been classified as undeveloped.
The Committee therefore said that the responsibility lies not only with the developers, but also with the state governments and affected municipalities and Panchayat.
During the hearing on the matter, Senior Advocate V Giri, who appeared from the side of home buyers, submitted that the area could be rebuilt to his CRZ 2019 norms. He added that the litigation so far has been one-sided. The case will be reviewed in the second week of November.
