Discovery Estates Pvt Ltd & Anr v. M.C.D & Ors

l'. (r/ ,/(, L( $-* lN 'l'!fii IIIGII COLilL'[' O]' DIII,,III AT NI'IW DI'ILIII i W.1,.(C) 85902A07 Judgnrcnt pronounced on Jurtuary 04, 2013 stiwn IN'tliltNA'I'IONAL ITASIIIONS L'l'D. & nNlt. ..... Pctitioncr 'l'htough: N{r.N.K. Kaul, Sr'. Aclvtlcatc with Mr'Akhil Sachar, Ms.Dcopal i Sharma, Advocatcs vcrsus (" ivl.C.l) & OI{S .-... I{csponclcnt a" 'l'hrough: Mr.I'arvindcr Clrauhan, Adv. for l){.lSll} \{r.l)crrvrat Singh lbr Mr.I{ajiv l}artsal, Aclvocatc lor thc Dl)n Ms.Mini Pushkzrna aucl Mr.S.'l -vagi Advocatc for tlre NICI) . l?/.P.(C) 556r,/2007

i)lStlOVI:ltY lts't'n'flts PV't't.'lD & ANlt ..... pctirior:cr' 'l'hrough: r\4r.N.K. Kaul, Sr. Advocatc rvith fi.{r.Akhii Sachar-lv4s.Dccpali Shanna, A dvocatcs \/Oi'sus "S M.1.1) & gRS ..... ltcspondcnt 'l'htotrgh: Mr.Parvindcr Chauhan, .Ad\'- lbl I)l.JSII] Mr.I)cvvrat Singh {ilr Mr.Itajiv }}ansal, Advocatc lbr thc i)I)n il,{s.Mini Pusltkarna and Mr.S.'l'yagi Adv'ocalc for thc MCI) {lGiirtM: ! [ {}t:"' I3Lit M }{. J Li [iT' t{ltr': {;.S.S.[S'F]AN f .G$- s I sl i-1.N1, &-'g!fA!) :.

i)it:a,jitr!,,i, i,i blilt thcsi: *r'it pctitioiirs ar,*- <.:ourpici.*. Iloiii tl".c (iti;1i,.)tls t1;-1., (' i:,-:cn iic:ircl togcllrcr i'viih i.li': cr:nsr:ut ol' Lirc tr'lill'iics atr'*j uro 5;i;i1-. riisposc,.! ol'i-.)'ri conlnlorr r;rcior. -l}c pctilionc,r in thc V/i'it i)ctilit'rr L'.'.i:.(a:J tl:;gt, & 855O/?-OO7 Potic i'rili; Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. J F: No.8560/2A07 .inter alia sceks cluashing ancl sctting asiclc of ordcr Dll24lDir.(IfI,)/S& JJl07 cldtcd 14. I 1 .2001 and noticc No.D/8/I{P

(Ccfl)/2006 clatccl 12.01 .2006 issuecl by rc'spondcnt no.1 and all subscclucnt procccdings takcn by thc rcspondcnt no.1 in purstlancc to thc canccllation ordor. A dircction is also sought to rcspondcnt tro.l to isstre a rro cluc cerlificatc with respect to building consttuctcd upon plot No.8, Shivaji Placc District Ocntrc, I{aja (}ardcn, Ncw [)clhi, which is rcquircd by thc rcspondcirt no.2 lbr issuancc of a complotion-culn-occupanoy cortificntc. An idcntical praycr is rnadc in thc Writ Pctition No.8590/2007 witlr rcspcct to cancollation ordcr datcd DlI23lDir.(I{l')iS&IJl07 datcd

14.11.:).A0-l r.virh rcspcc:t to plot bcating No.7, Shivaji Placc l)istrict (lcntlc, Ifujq (iatclcn, Ner,v Dclhi. l;or thc sakc o{'convcnicncc nccossary lacts in rcspcct of Writ Pelition No.ti560/2001 alc hcing noticcd. Petitioncr no.l is statccl to bc a colnpany iucorporatccl undcr thc Companics Act, 1956 and is tllt: aluction purchascr of ptol lrlo.ti, Shivaji Placc District (JenLrc, ltaja (iardcn, Ncr'v I)clhi, lrorn Slurn ancl J.J. Dcpalttncnt, MCD. 'fhc pctitioucr n<1.1 ltas constrnctcd a corlrnercial cornpicx in accordatrcc tvith il:c lcrms and conclitions prcscribcd by thc Slum Dcpartrncrrt of thc MCI) and l)elhi lluilcling Ilyc-laws, a[1er sanction ft'orn thc I)I)A. Approxirnatcly '1.5 crorcs is stiltccl to havc L'tccn spcnt in dcvcioping and constrttcting Lhe plot No.ti shivaji Placc I)istricr ccntrc, I{aja Galdcn. New Dclhi. It is thc casc ol' thc pctiticlncr that upon cortplctiou ol' conslt't-tctitln pctitioncr hais obtaiucd a NOC lrorn Iiirc Scrviccs and lras applicd to l)I)v\ Ior issuancc of COC lbr which inspcction stood citrricd out aucl otltcr lilrrnalities alc complcLe. Mr.Kaul, lcatncd scnior counsei lor ti'rc pctiticlncr strbrnits that thc application of thc pctitioncr 1or. issnancc of COC vrith rcspcct to lllot ., ,aa J. *. w.P.(c) 8s9O & 8,6A/2007 Pqge 2 of I(, .J L) No.8, Shivaji l)lacc District Ccntrc I{aja (iat'clcn, Ncw I)clhi, rvas pencling bCfilrU l)llA,:rvhc1 thc Slum Dcpartmcnt of MCD issuccl a show causc poricc clarod 12.01".2006 with rcspcct to plot No.8, Shivaji Placc l)istrict Ccntrc, I{a.ja (iardcn, Ncw Dclhi, allcging that Arch. lDy. Dircctor (fP)l ol'MCt) l"rad rcportcd that pcLitioncr had amalgamalcd plot No.8, Shivaji Placc I)isttict Ccntre, ltaja (iarclc.n, Ncw Dclhi, with thc adjacent plot i.c. Plot No.7, purchascd by Sow.a International Fashions I,td. (pctitioncr in Wrir Pctition No.8 59012007) in thc same auction as was hclcl by thc Slum I)cpartmcnt of MCD, in rcspcct of plot no.8, in violation o{ thc conclil"ions ol-thc lcasc Dcccl clatcd I 1.03.2003 cxccutccl by thc Slum l)opartmcnt of MCI) in rcspect of plot No.ti, in favorir of thc pctitioncr. A sirnilar shorv causc noticc was arlso issucd to thc pctitiurcr in Wl'(C)No.859012007. 't'hc pctitioncr rcplicd to thc show causc noticc isstrccl by thc MCD vide its letter datecl 06.02.200(r and apprized thc Slum I)cparlnrcnt of MCI) that all tho tcrms alti conclitions of thc loasc clcccl lracl bcen duly cornplicd rvith and thc pctitioncr had not violatcd suoh tl condition. It was catcgorically, statccl t]rat thc pctitioner has ttot attralganratcd plot No.8 rvith thc acljaccnt plot No.7. A rcqucst rvas madc ltrr withdrawal of thc shorv calrse noticc. Dissitril;llccl r.vil"h thc reply of thc pctitioncr', a cancellation ordcr clatccl l4.J I .200't rt'as passctl.

¶5In thc rncanu,hilc, 1hc I)DA inlbmrccl thc pctitioncr that COC rvith rcspcct to plot no.8 rvoulcl ttc issrrcd only upcln rcccipt o{'rto duc ccrtifi catc INOC ll-orn thc Slurir l)cpartrnc.nt of MCD, as thc Slutu [)cpartmcnt of MCI) was thc lancl owning agcncy. ttcpcatcd rcprcsontations tladc to the Slunr I)cpart"rncnt did not trcar any fi'uit. A rc1:rcscntation clatcd 29.0u.2007 was . also nra<Jc to thc Cornmissionor, MCD sccking issuancc ol' rccprisitc instructions tcl thc conccrncd ofliccr of [hc Slum I)cparLtncnt ol-MCI) to issr.rc ei no tluc ccrtitlcatc / NOC with rcspcct to plot No.ti ilncl also soughl a tN.P.iC) 8590 {! 8560/2007 Page 3 of 1O .|

¶6an oppol-tr-rnity o[ pcrsonal hcaring. Conscqucnt to thc rcprcscntation, a pcr'sona],itoatirtg was grantcd by 1hc Commissioncr, MCD on 07.09'2007 rvhen tttc pctitioncr rnaclc oral submissions rvith rcspcct Lo the rcprcscntations so madc. l)ursnant to thc hcaring lurthcl rvrittcn subrnissions wcrc filcd portaining to thc cluorics raiscd during the pcrsonal hcaring. It is thc casc of thc pctitioncr that in thc writtcn strbmissions filed on 10.09.2007 bclbrc thc (llnrnissiqncr, NICD, cach and cvcry aspcot of thc.show catlsc noticc was dcalt with. Mr.Kaul, furthcr submits that during the pcrsonal hcaring pctitioncr was dirccl"ccl to clarify ccrLairr now aspccts of thc rnattcr which did not lall wittrin tho scopc of cithcr Lhc issuance of no duc ccrtilicaLc by thc Slurtr I)cparlmcnt or thc MCI)'s shor,v causc noticc. On 15.11.2007 thc pctitioncr roccivccl a canccllation lctler. It is contcndcd that although thc capccllatign grclcr mcntions that various cncltrirics and procc'cdiu,illl \vclc carriccl out intcrnally by M()) and thc Ollcc of llon'blc l.it:trtcnaul (iovernol' of l)clhi rcglarcling thc impugncd noticc datcd 12.01.2006 and rtrc rcplics / re1:rcscntations clatcd 27.02.2006, 10.09.2007, thc pctitioncrs wcrc ncithcr inlbrurccl, nor associatcd in any such procccclings. 11 is also thc casc oI thc pctitioncr that no inspcction, as allcgcd we5 carricd out on

02.10.200-l or 11.10.2007'by thc MCD in thc prcscncc/:rf tfic pctiiioiius, rror thc pctitioncrs arc awalc of any such inspcction. lyr.Kaul, furtlrer submits that copics oi thc inspcction rcports and othcr rniitcriul souglrt to bc rcliccl upon by llrc rcspondctit, whilc passirrgr the orclcr datcd 08.1 I .2007 was ncvcr providcd to thc pc[itic'ncr', thorcbl' dcpriying thc pctitioncr of their valuablc right o1'cxplaitring ot rclrutting, thc santc, rvhich arnclunts to rriolalion of principlcs cll'natLrral.irrs,ticc. lt is subrrrittcd that thc tanccllatiori orclcr o[ 14.11.20A7 is dn'oid ol'arry J

¶7{

¶8w.P.(c) 8s9O & 8j6O/2OO7 Page 4 oi lt) I )) L). l'cason, is voicl ancl unconstitutional for warrt o'f rcasons. 11 is also the casi:' ol' ths .pgtitioncr that thc propcrty is without any cncroachtncnt, uriauthorizccl construction and thc salnc has bccn cotrstructccl, as pcr thc sancticlnsd plan. Mr.Kaul, lcarncd scnior counscl for thc pctitioncr also subtnits thal thc carrrccllation order datccl 14.1i.2007 as wcll as thc Show Causc Noticc clatcc{ 12.1.2006 was rcsttictcd to thc allcgcd atnalgamation of Plot no.8 rvith Plot no.7 in violation of Clausc Il(2X4) of thc Lcasc Dcc'd datcd 1 1.3.2003 as cxccutccl bcttvccn thc Presiclcnt oI'India and thc Pctitioncr rvith rcspcct to l,lot No.8. 'l'hc grounds so raiscd arc clroncous that thc pctitioncr hacl arnalgarnatcd plot no.8 rn,ith adjaccnt ploL no.7, in violation of thc I.casc dccd. Mr.Kaul, lirrtlrcr sr-rbnrits ihat sincc thc sland of thc Slurn and J.J. Wing oI MCI) and l.hc stand of tho l)Dz\ was at variancc in thc orclcr clatcd 2U.04.2009, thc colrrt noticcd thc sr-rbrnissions of counsct lor tbc pctitionr:r thnt on thc samc causc o[ acticln a shor.v causc noticc was issttcd [:y t]rc rcspondcnL no.2, I)Dn on A.02.2006 Lcl thc pctitioncr which was u,itlrdran'n by tlrc rcsponclcnt no.2 vide ordcr datcd 26.02.2007, ltor,vct'cL, thc rcspondcrrt no.l, MCD still pcrsistcd in issuing o[ thc canccliatiotr ordcr. Kccping in rnind that two atrthoritios bcforc thc CourL had takcn a , variablc staucl on tlrc ltasis of sanrc docutncnts, thc !icurtcnant (iovctnor was rcclucstcci to call lbr ei rncctiug of tho Vice-Chaitlrtait. I)l)4, Cornrnissioner of MCI) auci tl'r" Aciclitional Courrlissiotrcr, Slurri iinti J.J. Wing to cxplorc Lhc possibility of rcsolving thc issuc.

¶11In cornpliancc rvith the albresaid ordcr a status rcltort l'ras bccn lilcd by' rcsponclcnt No.2 ancl 4 on thc issuc oi' allcgccl amalgatnaticltt, rvhich rcvcais that ttrcrc is no amarlganrattion of plo'r }.lo.7 and plot No.tQi-llavingl rctrlatcl to thc slatus lcport, it has bccn praycd that l"hc show caltsc trt:ticc / i {}. tfi.p.{c} 8s9o & 856O/2.OO7 Pt,:: 5 c; lii clatcd 12.01 .2A06 and ihb canccllation ordcr datccl 14.11.2007 arc a nuliiry, wfriifr wcro passcd on an cn'oncous prcmisc that thc pctitioncr had violiitcd clatiSc II (2) (a) of thc lcasc dccd datcd 11.03.2003.'

¶12As lar as ths irrcgularitics pointcd out in thc status rcport, it is contcnded by Mr.Kaul that thc samc arc bcyond the scopc of the show causc noticc ancl thc cancellation otdcr, and thus thc allcgcd irtcgularitics arc ncithcr within thc scopc of thc prcscnt r.vrit pctitions, nor thc authoritics can travcf bcyclnd thc shou, caLrsc notice. ln support o.f his submission, rcliancc is placcd on SACI AIIicd Products Ltd. (J.I'. Vs. Commissioner of Centrsl Iixcise, Meerut (2005) 7 SCC 159 and rnorc paflicr-rlarly ur paragraphs, 16, 17 and 1tJ, which are reproduccd bclow:

¶16'fhus accorcling to tho appcllalc 'I'ribunal, sincc the dcalcrs in {.lttar Praclcsh who purohascd thc goods from Synclct, and indcpcndcnt dcalcrs in othcr parts o1'thc countty to whorn thc appcllants dilcctly sold tho goods arc dilfcrcnt class of trriycrs, appcllants' pricc to the indcpcndcnt dcalcrs cannot bc takcn as thc basis lbr asscssing appcllants' salcs to Syndct in [Jttar Pradcsh. Ihis finding of thc appellatc 'I'ribunal is lrasccl cln first proviso to Sccticln 4(1)(a) of thc Ac1. Whilc thc shorv cattsc trotico aud thc orclcr of thc Collcctor plocccdcd on the basis of thc invocation of third proviso to Scction a(1)(a) of tho Act, thc appcllatc h'ibunal lor thc lirst tirnc in thc impugncd ordcr has strsLainecl tho procecdings on thc basis of first proviso to Scction a( 1)(a) of thc Act. lt rvas argued that thc first proviso to Scction a(1)(a) of thc r\ot rvas ncvcr invokccl by thc I)cpaltmcnt citlter in the r;hou'caLlss rloticc or in thc irnpugncd ordcr ancl i1 rvas for the tirst tirlc that tlro appcllalc 'l'ribr"rnal in thc irnpugncd ordsr Iras sought to sustatjn thc irnpugnccl ordcr by irll'oking thc Iirst proviso to Section a(1Xa) of thc Act. It is thus sccn that thc 't'ribunal lras gonc totally bcyond thc shou' caLlse uolicc ancl thc olclcr of ihc Co[[cctor, which. is irnpcnnissiblc. 'I'hc appellatc 'ti'itrunal cannot sustain thc casc of thc Itcvcnuc against thc appcllattts olt a ground not raisctl by thc l{cvcnuc cithcr in ftc shor.v oiltisc noticc or in thc ordcr. w.P.(c) 859A & 8560/2007 Poge'lt of 10 3' %) t3.

¶17ln this context, wc lnay uscfully refcr to tho judgrncnt of this Court in thc casc of l{cckitt & Cohnan of India Ltcl. vs. CCII, 1996 (88) IILT 64i. This Cout't hclcl that it is . beyond thc cornpctcncc of thc ltibunal to rnakc out in fav<lur ol thc l{cvcnuc a casc rvhich thc I{cvcnuc had ncvcr canversscd and which thc appcllants had nevcl' bccn rccluircd tcl tlrcct.

¶18'I'he impugncd ordcr of thc 'I)'ibuna[ which had gonc bcyond thc show oausc noticc and thc ordcr of thc rcspondcnt-Collcctor is, thcrcforc, liablc to bc sct zrsidc." Counsel for thc MCD has iclied on the stalus rcport which has bccn filcd bclbrc this court. Mr.Chaulran, counscl lor the MCD subrnits tlrat a joiril insl:ccticln rvas calricci ont with rcspcct to propcrtics in both thc writ pctitions and during inspccti<n various othcr violations wcrc fcluucl, which wcrc cornmittccl by thc pctiticlncr, including construction of watcr storagc talk, S'lJ), rain watcr harvcsting arrangcmcnt, additional scrrvcragc lines, tire tiglrting lincs, cablcs, roacls land scaping work outsiclc tlrc plot arca lvitirout auly appl'oval lrour thc rc'spondcnt. It is furthcr alloged that in violatior-r of clausc 6(a) of thc lcasc dccd thc builcling has bcc,n crccupicd without an occupat'lcy ccrLificatc, shops / floor spaoe ltave bccn transibrrcd, posscssion partcd in lavor.rr of third partics in clcar violation of thc lcrms and conclitions of tho lcasc.

¶14r\s I'ar as the arnalgarna!-ion is conccmcd, Mr.Chauhan, sr-rbtnits that duling inspcction it was lilund that both the plots wcrc inclcpcndcnt by ri,ay of scpat'alc propcfl.y cxtcrnai walls. 15, I havc hcarcl counscl tbr tlre partics and considcrocl thoir rival contcutions. Issuing of a show cALtsc noticc daled 12.01.2006 ancl tho cauccllatiotr orclcr issncd subscclucrr[ thcrcto has lcd to thc iilirig of the prcscnt writ potitions. As pcr thc shoi,v callss noticc thc tcsponclcnt rlo.l hacl rroticccl ttrat plot No.8 had bcerr arnalganratcd with plot No.7 itr violrrtitln of clausc ll (2) (a) of thc lcasc dccd. Dissatislicd with thc reply of thc pctit ioncr thc w.P.(c) 8s9o & 8560/2007 Itage -; t,f 7O o canccllation otdcr was passcd. 'Ihc rclcvant cxtract of the shclw causc noticc datcd 12.01 .2006 and thc canccllation otdcr arc rcprocluccci bclow: '-'sltovu Csuse Notice doted .12.01.2006 Ancl whereqs the lessee is reqttir"ecl tct ahicle with the ternts antl conclitiorts oJ' Lease Deed and Clause II (2)(4) of the scticl I'ettse Dcecl proviclecl thal Lessee shct'll not clefectt in any manner from llte luy ottt plan nor aller tlte :;ite of the commercial. pl.ol/ mixed lctnd use ytlctt. Jitr the suicl purpose eil.her" by su.b-divisirtn, amcrlgantation or otherwise unl.es^s speciJicctlly perruitted lo do so by the Lessor'. And wherecrs it has been noticed/ represented, b1t the AIICII. Dy.Director (T'tr) on 24.11.2005 thal yrnt have amaLs3ctntated plot uncler reference with Plol, No.7 i.n violation of the aforesaicl conc{ilions rf the l.ease J)eed." " Cuncellttiort orcler clsted 14. 11.2007 AND WllltlltiA$ yotr were issuecl notice to shrn'v ccruse ttntler Cluuse III qf the lease deed vide Notice No.D/?//RP CeIl/2A)(t e.{atecl 12.0L2006 recph"ing yoxt to shotv ccu4se ugcrinst llte violcttion oJ'('lau.se II (2) (ril of the said lease deect, within j0 days fi'om thC dctte of receipl o/'snicl. nolice. AND WIIliRIitlS loru' representcrtions tlcttecl 27.02.200(t,

10.09.2007 ctncl other correspondence ltave been consiclet'ed in depth. Yott tvere also c(for"ded. an opportuni$t cy porrring in pet"sotl on 07.09.2007 in the ubove connection in the clfice o.f Commissioncr, MCD.' AND WIII\RI\AS lhc site inspectktn was ctlso ccnclttctecJ ()n

01.03.2007 qnd 02.10.2007 by the rfficers ,tJ' Slum & J'.1. T'hereufier, inler tleparl.mental' comntittee u)as constituted to encptire into legal ancl techni.cal aspects. On i i.10.2A07, l:he .site inspection was ctlso conducled by the inter diparlmenla! commillee nternbers unei-fbtmd the c{evintions qnd. violations pointecl rrul in lhe shon, c(ll$e iiolice datecl 12.01.2006 were not rec:ti{iecl by -vau qncl the comntittee submitted it.s reltort accordingly. - Page I of10 w.P.(c) 8590 & B,60/2007 a )? AJier consiclet'ing the ntaterial ctnd facts on record ancJ tlte entire issue in btu.lily, the llon'hle L/.. Governor, Delh.i has been plea,sed kt delernrine tlte leqse vide ltis order dated 08.I I .2007. Yott ctre hereby asked to handover the vacttnt ancl peaceful pctsses,sion of pt'operty, under" reference, l.o the concet'necl lixecutiue lingineer DD ($-f on 21.11.2007 at IL'00 AM, who has heen elirected to retnain present at site .for the said pm"ltose on. lhe ttltlxtintecl clate ancl linte. " ' 16, A pcrusai of the show causc noticc ancl thc canccllation order cloally shows that the only violation brought to thc notico of thc pctitioncr pcrtained to the amarlgauration oI both thc plots. 'Ihc status rcport which . has bcen lilcd pursuant to ttrc orders passcd by this court clearly supports thc casc of thc pctitioncr and rvhich lact is not denicd by thc counscl lbr thcr rcspondenl.s that thcrc is no amalgamation of both thc plots. ltclcvant cxtractcd fi'otn status rcport rcads ad undcr: ,'4. AMAI,GAMATION 'fhc consttucl.ion of plot No.7 & 8 arc as pcr thc approvcd lal,ottt platr, plot no. 7 & 8 are indcpcndcnl plots abuttin$ each otlicr ancl scparato with an cxpansion joinl. 'l'hc building plans ol-both thc plots were sanctioncd scparatoly. I)uring inspcction both plots \ rerc found indcpcndcnt hy way of scparatc propcrty cxtctnal rvalls. Sincc, thcrc is no sctback rnentioncd in thc approvcd Layout and MPD-2001, thcrcforc, sctback, wcrc not'insistcd upon.'Ihc en1ry &'cxit points in both thc buildings arc scparalc at both grorrnC l1oor lcvcls ancl o[ bascmcnt. fhc itrtcr-connection in couidols in both thc plots arc grouncl floor & uppcr floor is allclwcd through al.riuni which is as pcr the conlrol cclndition."

¶11't'hc submissious of lv{r.Chauhan, with pointcd out arc unacccptable as no show thc pctitioncr till datc rvitlr-rcgard to thc per settlccl law, thc MCI-) catttlttl travel tFJ.P.(C) 85gO & B560,t2007 rcgard tcl thc olhor violatious' causc noticc has bccn issuccl 1o violations allegcd by thcm. As beyorrd thc tcnns of thu.slto\v tcgtIai70 ,' causc noticc, as the pctitioncrs were never grantc<l an opporlunity to urcct thc saitJ allcgations against them. Rcsultantly both thc writ pctitions atc allor,r,ccl. 'l'he show cause noticc and the canccllatioll ordcl arc cluashcd ancl t6c pctitioncr.s rvill trc cntitlcd to all thc consccil-rcntial rclicfs, rvhich 1yr1-c p<lt corrsiclcrc<J by thc respondent on account oI thc ordcr of cilnccllation, hor.vcrrcr, it is made clear that in casc thc rcspclndcnts find apy yi6tation in cilhcr of thc propcrtics, it would be opcn tbr thcnr to takc rccoru--sc tn snch rcrncclios, which may bc availablc to thcm, in accordancc "l,itlt linv. ttt. Writ pctitions arc allowccl in abovc tcrms. Ncl orclcr as to costs. .!ANLIAI{Y 04, 2013 ssll F -/ (;.s.slsTAN[, J W.P.{C} B59O 6t 8564/2007 PtrjP i0 trj 10