FARM UNITS (Y - SITE)
Updates on 17 Sep 17. [Read more...]
Updates on 28 Sep 17. [Read more...]
Updates on 17 Aug 17. [Read more...]
Updates on 17 Jul 17. [Read more...]
Updates on Jul 17. [Read more...]
Updates as on 15 Jun 17. [Read more...]
Updates as on 17 May 17. [Read more...]
Farm Units : Tender Documents for Construction/ Repair of existing Road. [View Details...]
Update on Mutation (07 Mar 16). [Read more...]
Update on Mutation (09 Feb 16). [Read more...]
UPDATE DATED 25 JAN 16 ON ‘Y’ SITE FARM UNITS SCHEME AS FOLLOWS:-
1. Subsequent to resignation of the second erstwhile Arbitrator on 25 Sep 15, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi was approached for appointment of new Arbitrator. Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 08 Dec 15 has appointed Mr. Anil Kumar Kathuria as new Arbitrator under the aegis of the DAC.
2. Mutation records pertaining to all 189 ‘Y’ site land transactions which were cancelled in 2006, have been updated and copy obtained. Allottees may collect a copy of the same from AFNHB.
3. This for information of all concerned.
Offg. PD (FU)
Blank Uundertaking format. [Read more...]
Ram Singh Vs. AFNHB Case at Faridabad has been dismissed. [Read more...]
Removal of First Charge and Bank Guatantee-Y Farms. [Read more...]
The High Court of Delhi, Order dated 10 Jan 2014. [Read more....]
1. Please refer e-mail dated 10 Jan 14.
2. It is for the information of all concerned that the Interim Application filed by some of the allottees (Wg Cdr R Khosla & others) with a prayer to become necessary party to the Arbitration Appeal No. 10/2013 was clubbed with main case as hearing of Interim Application requires notice to the existing parties i.e. AFNHB & the developer and their objection, if it had been taken up and would have required considerable time.
3. When the Appeal No. 10/2013 filed by the Board was taken up, Wg Cdr R Khosla informed the Hon’ble Court about the Interim Application filed by them to become party to the case. Before the counsel for the respondent (Lt Cdr Dariyao Singh) could speak and seek adjournment for filing objection, the counsel representing the AFNHB requested the Hon’ble High Court to proceed with the appeal. The Counsel for the AFNHB also informed the Court that if the appeal itself is decided then there is no requirement of hearing the Interim Application. The Hon’ble Court allowed the AFNHB’s counsel to argue the main case.
4. The case was argued at length by the counsel for AFNHB by giving background of the case including reasons for executing the undertaking in 2004 and dismissal of application for removal of ‘First Charge’ by the Ld. Arbitrator in 2012 without considering our plea to substitute the undertaking by suitable Bank Guarantee, which led to filing of appeal before the Hon’ble High Court.
5. The counsel of the developer argued that the undertaking was outcome of the agreement reached between the parties in 2004 and can not be modified. Further, since the developer has already filed alternate claim over the land, it would not be appropriate to vacate lien on land.
6. The Hon’ble Court pronounced that the alternate claim of the developer is not maintainable as the same is not a part of initial agreement between the parties. Therefore, it was not open for the arbitrator to allow such application.
7. After hearing the arguments of both side, the Hon’ble Court allowed the appeal and directed the Board to furnish Bank Guarantee for Rs. 25 Crores within four weeks and subsequent to furnishing of said BG, the First Charge over the land given to developer shall stand vacated. The Hon’ble Court also pronounced that since, the appeal has been allowed, the Interim Application filed by Wg Cdr R Khosla & others does not survive and accordingly stands disposed off.
8. It is fortunate that the AFNHB’s counsel was able to steer the case to logical conclusion. If the Interim Application had been taken up for hearing by the Hon’ble Court then there were chances of indefinite delays as the whole process would have become subject to series of adjournments for filing objections, rejoinders and counter objections. This aspect had already been clarified to the association during the meeting held at this Board on 12 Dec 13. The Board on its part has been providing updates to AIDYFWA on regular / as and when required basis. The Board on its part has not been able to appreciate the motives behind another independent party trying to be party to the case in this manner.
9. The detailed order is awaited and shall be disseminated on receipt.
Updates : (10 Jan 14)
Updates : (27 Nov 13)
Photographs and old updates
Old Updates :
Location of Project