The company was reacting to the Decemeber 8 Kerala High Court order directing it to demolish certain portions of its apartment complex, constructed on the banks of Chilavanoor backwaters in Kochi in violation of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) norms.

Justice A V Ramakrishna Pillai issued the direction while disposing of a petition filed by A V Antony of Kochi against the construction alleging that there was violation of CRZ notification. The order said that there were encroachment even into the back waters by more than 100 meters.

Responding to the order, DLF said that the company awaits the full text of the Order so as to get a detailed understanding of the matter after which it will take appropriate remedial measures in consultation with its legal counsel.

The company's arm, DLF Home Developers has been made aware of the Order passed by the single bench of High Court regarding its 'Riverside Project' at Chilavanoor, Vyttila, Kochi, the filing added.

Stating that the company is highly compliance oriented and takes all necessary approvals very seriously, DLF said: "In case of 'Riverside' project also, all required approvals like Building Permit, NOC from Pollution Control Board, Fire & Rescue Department, Naval Airport and also final orders of Environment cum CRZ clearance have been taken".

DLF asserted that it has not "committed any violations", and that its actions have been consistent with various approvals that have been obtained by due application of proper process, and as have been endorsed by concerned authorities in various forums from time to time.

The company in a press release said that It may be noted that in recent months since the controversy on Riverside project erupted, there have been two High Court Orders.

The Order in August 2014, clarified that the State Government and Chief Secretary have no jurisdiction over the approvals granted by State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA)/Ministry of Environment & Forests (MoEF), and any observations by State Government could be treated as for information purpose only.

On the same day another order was passed by a two member Bench dismissing a writ filed by another private individual seeking action against the Company on basis of the Chief Secretary's report.