ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Wednesday declined to grant immediate relief to nearly 30 apartment owners in the high profile One Constitution Avenue dispute, intensifying uncertainty surrounding one of the capital’s most controversial luxury developments. The court directed the Capital Development Authority to submit a detailed response before the next hearing scheduled for May 25.
A division bench comprising Justice Mohammad Azam Khan and Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas heard intra court appeals filed by prominent apartment owners, including former air chief Mujahid Anwar Khan, former ICC president Ehsan Mani and former Senate chairman Wasim Sajjad. The appellants challenged portions of an earlier verdict that they argued adversely affected the rights of third party apartment buyers.
During the hearing, CDA counsel maintained that the lease for the project had already been cancelled through a clear court order and argued that the entire property now legally vested in the authority. The counsel contended that the original lease deed lacked legal validity and therefore could not create enforceable ownership rights for sub lessees or apartment buyers.
The CDA further argued that the project developer had paid only around 16 percent of the agreed amount over the past 21 years and never acquired complete ownership rights. It told the court that the land had originally been allocated for a five star hotel project and not for the creation of private apartment sub leases.
The bench questioned the CDA over its failure to challenge a committee reportedly constituted by the prime minister regarding the dispute. Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas observed that the matter was no longer limited to the developer alone but had now evolved into a dispute involving affectees and apartment owners residing in the building.
Counsel for the apartment owners alleged that officials accompanied by police had attempted to force open apartment doors and sought immediate court intervention. However, the bench stopped short of issuing any restraining order, observing that the building remained intact while the CDA was expected to clarify its future course of action before the next hearing.
