KNM & Partners, Law Offices

We are pleased to share that, by way of an order passed in New Okhla Industrial Development Authority & Ors. v. M/s Sunshine Trade Tower Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1800, on 08.09.2026, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Civil Appeal filed by NOIDA, thereby upholding the judgment of the Allahabad High Court. KNM and Partners represented M/s Sunshine Trade Tower Pvt. Ltd. in the matter. The team was led by Mr. Vijay Nair, Senior Partner; Mr. Manoranjan Sharma, Partner and Mr. Prabhakar Tiwari, Associate Partner assisted by Ms. Shruti, Associate and Ms. Tanvi Garg, Associate.A ruling that reinforces a simple but powerful principle: A public authority cannot benefit from its own default.The case centered on NOIDA's refusal to extend its Zero Period Policy to a developer who could not proceed with construction because the promised 45-metre front road, forming the principal frontage under the sanctioned building plan, was never delivered. The land was unacquired Abadi land, encroached upon, and successive reports (Tehsildar, UPRERA, NOIDA's own Additional CEO, the State Government, and the Deputy Collector) confirmed this fact. Yet NOIDA argued that "some" access was available and, therefore, no relief was due.The Supreme Court disagreed, and in doing so, laid down guidance that resonates far beyond this dispute:-       Policies are to be read purposively, not like statutes: Courts must consider both the micro-object of a specific clause and the macro purpose of the policy as a whole.-       "Some access" is not "adequate access": A developer struggling to keep construction alive is precisely who the Zero Period Policy is meant to protect.-       Frontage and elevation are commercial fundamentals, not aesthetics: A shift from a 45-metre frontage to a 24-metre frontage is a material alteration that impacts visibility, footfall, marketability, and investor confidence.-       No fault can be fastened on the developer for the authority's failure: NOIDA's denial of Zero Period benefit and its persistent refusal to sanction the revised site plan were held unreasonable and untenable in law.-       Private investment deserves institutional certainty: If private enterprise is to partner in nation-building, public authorities must honor the promises embedded in their lease deeds.