Sandeep Dwellers Private Limited
Bombay High Court-Nagpur Bench
Date of Judgement -01/12/2020
Sub:Houses developed under the Affordable Housing scheme where the Maharashtra housing Development authority(MHADA) was obliged to purchase or auction- notification issued withdrawing the obligation to purchase-whether retrospective or prospective.

This is one of the cases where Real Estate Industry which is saddled with inventory on account of development of affordable housing as per the promised scheme of the Government.
The Bombay high court in the above case held that it is well settled that all the laws are presumed to be prospective unless the legislature unequivocally expresses its intent for the operation of such provision retrospectively. The court relying on the decisions CIT vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd.; (2018) 3 SCC 253; CIT vrs. Vatika Township (P) Ltd.; (2015) 1 SCC 1 and P.D. Aggarwal and ors vrs. State of U.P. and ors;(1987)3SCC622 held that the notification was only prospective in nature and thus MHADA was obliged to buy the units under the scheme.

This judgement thus, in effect deals with the doctrine of promissory estoppel as well as the retrospective operation of a Notification and thus will be helpful in all branches of law.

Ramesh Patodia
03-12-2020