Request for withdrawal of Supreme Court order prohibiting authority to charge more than 8% interest

New Delhi
During the hearing of the Amrapali case, it was argued in the Supreme Court by the Noida and Greater Noida Authority that the court should withdraw the order stating that no more than 8 per cent interest should be charged in recovery of the builder’s dues. Lawyer Haris Salve, appearing for the authority in the Supreme Court, said that the order would have serious implications and would result in huge loss of public money.

Advocate ML Lahouti, appearing for the Boyers in the Supreme Court, told NBT that after the arguments in this case, the builders will present the arguments on March 5 and the other cases will be heard on March 4. During the hearing in the Supreme Court, Harish Salve said that on 10 June 2020, the Supreme Court had said that the Noida Authority and the Greater Noida Authority cannot charge much interest on their dues.

The court had said that the amount of installment payment which has been delayed should not be charged more than 8% as interest. Salve said that this order took place in the Amrapali case, but it should not benefit in the case of other builders. In this case, Noida and Greater Noida Authority could not expressly put forward the case before the order was passed.

Actually the Authority was realizing that this case would be limited to Amrapali case only. But this decision is going to have wide impact and this decision will be referred elsewhere and there will be a huge loss of public money. This decision will have an impact in the case of authorities across the country.

Appearing on behalf of Harish Salve Authority said that Noida and Greater Noida Authority are not investors, the order passed in this case will have the effect that this decision will be cited in the case of authority across the country. Due to this, the authority will suffer a loss of about 7500 crores.

The authority is a government administrative office and this loss will be the loss of public money of the tax payers. In such a situation the Supreme Court should use Article-142 and withdraw its order of 10 June 2020.