ICFAI UNIVERSITY, DEHRADUN

ICFAI LAW SCHOOL

TOPIC: Impact of External and Internal Business Environment Factors on
DLF

SUBMITTED TO: - MR. GAGAN GULATI

SUBMITTED BY: - AMITESH KUMAR
COURSE: - B.B.A LLB (HONS.)
ENROLLMENT ID: - 18FLICDDNO1017
SEC: -A

1|Page
BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT
● Business Environment refers to the surrounding in which economic activity of buying and
selling with a motive of profit takes place.

INTERNAL FACTORS OF BUSINESS

● Internal factors refer to anything that is within the company and under the control of the
company no matter whether they are tangible or intangible. The types if internal factors that
companies deal with are:
Mission, Vision, Values, Objectives, Infrastructure, Human Resource etc…

EXTERNAL FACTORS OF BUSINESS

● External factors are factors that are not under the control of business. It allows businessman to
take suitable adjustments to their plan to make it more adaptable to the external environment.
External Factors are further divided into two parts:
a) Micro-factors
b) Macro-factors

a) Micro-factors
● It includes factors such as: Competitor, Retailers, Media, Consumer, Suppliers etc

b) Macro-factors
● It includes factors such as: Political, Social, Technological, Demographical, Geographical,
Legal etc

2|Page
INTRODUCTION
DLF (DELHI LAND AND FINANCE):
 DLF Limited or DLF (Delhi Land and Finance) is the India’s biggest real estate
developer based in New Delhi, India.
 DLF Limited is India’s largest real estate company in terms of revenues, earnings, market
capitalization and developable area. It has a 62-year track record of sustained growth,
customer satisfaction and innovation.
 The DLF Group was founded by Raghuvendra Singh in 1946. DLF developed residential
colonies in Delhi such as Krishna Nagar, South Extension, Greater Kailash, Kailash
Colony and Hauz Khas.
 With over six decades of excellence, DLF is a name synonymous with global standards,
new generation workspaces and lifestyles.
 The company is currently headed by Indian billionaire Kushal Pal Singh.

Internal Factors External Factors (Micro External Factors (Macro

factors) Factors)
Mission Competitor Legal
Vision Marketing & Promotion Technology
Values Retailer Economic
Strategy Consumer Geographical
Goodwill Social
Demographical

Internal Factor -- DLF

DLF’s:
1) MISSION
● To build world-class real estate concepts across six business lines with highest standards of
professionalism, ethics quality and customer service.
2) VISION
● To contribute significantly to build the new India and become the world’s most valuable real
estate company.

3) VALUES
● Sustained efforts to enhance customer value and quality
● Ethical and professional service
● Compliance and respect for all community environmental and legal requirements.

3|Page
4) STRATEGY
In order to deal with current business environment DLF followed different corporate strategy:
● Business organized on vertical basis: Homes, Retail, Hotels etc., each independent of each
other.
● DLF at the corporate level, began to play the role of an aggregator of business where stiff,
competition interest of different SBUs and businesses get aligned.
● Key focus on execution of projects and with core business reaching stable operating
performance, focus is to aggressively ramp up new business.

5) GOODWILL
To maintain its goodwill and brand loyalty DLF took measures like:
● Brand Loyalty Creation: DLF has been associated with unique buildings and this has helped
DLF to create a brand loyalty that is not common in real estate firm.
● Brand Building Exercise: DLF has been associated with IPL and other such ventures and
hence created a nationwide brand recognition which only few of its competitors had.
● To drive its social initiatives, DLF established DLF Foundation in 2008 for the upliftment of
the underprivileged. The Foundation creates sustainable, innovative and inclusive livelihood
opportunities for both rural and urban communities.

External Factor-
Macro-Factor-- DLF
DLF’s
1) Legal
Real estate has been governed by a patchwork of regulations that promotes arbitrariness
in doing business and to deal with environmental clearance and other legal issues, DLF:
● The Chandigarh High Court has stayed country’s largest developer from selling,
marketing and constructing its latest luxury residential project – Impact -- Increased
land reserve in strategic locations,
●CCI pronounced DLF guilty for gross for abusing its dominant position and imposing
unfair conditions in the sale of flats – Impact -- Expand core business verticals
nationally,
● CCI imposed penalty of Rs.6300 million; issued ‘ Cease and detist’ order against DLF
– Impact -- Diversification in hotel development and SEZ development.

2) Technology

4|Page
 In order to deal with latest technology in real estate sector DLF made these crucial
changes:
● Hybrid Business Models: Sales and Lease business model.
● DLF has adopted a focus strategy by creating high entry barriers and unique
construction in marvels with latest technology available.
● DLF latest investment in technology and new construction techniques includes – Slip
form construction, pre- fabricated construction, Mivan technology, Fly Ash bricks etc

3) Economic
● With the economic policies of the country directed towards infrastructural development
spanning- express highways, roadways, airports and mega projects, DLF focus is on
increasingly expanding to the development of modern Special Economic Zone (SEZs)
● In line with this, DLF is aggressively pursuing the developments of SEZs across the
country with over half a dozen projects secured in northern India including Punjab and
Haryana.
● Further, DLF Retail in association with DT Cinemas, an integral part of its multiplexes,
is well on its way to enlarging its national leadership presence with firm outlays to
develop over 100 malls across some 60 cities nationally.

4) Geographic
In order to focus on core business and to deal with its wider expansion DLF had to
compromise and lessen its geographical business:
● DLF sold its 150MW in Gujrat to Bharat Light and Power private Ltd for 282.3Cr
● DLF also signed an agreement with Tulip Renewable Powertech Ltd to sell 34.5MW
Tamil Nadu plant with related liabilities, assets and long term loans for 188.7 Cr
● DLF completed the sale of its 33MW wind turbine project to violet green power for
Rs.67.44 Cr in Rajasthan
● DLF further spilts the business into three geographical areas- Gurgaon, Super Metros
and Rest of India. Each of these geographical segments are independently responsible
and accountable for all activities across the product value chain.

5) Social
● To drive its social initiatives, DLF established DLF Foundation in 2008 for the
upliftment of the underprivileged. The Foundation creates sustainable, innovative and
inclusive livelihood opportunities for both rural and urban communities.
● Samartha – Employability Initiative – opened 42 employability linked vocational
training centres under DLF LIFE to train 1 million youth.
● Aarogyam – Healthcare Initiative – One primary health centre in every cluster, periodic
inoculation, fumigation and eye camps. An international NGO partner has been given a
tour of the villages and it is planned that they will undertake additional programmes like-
entrepreneurship development etc.

6) DEMOGRAPHICAL

5|Page
 ● As Indian population comprises of 65% of people who are below 35 years of age and
increasing urbanization has created a great demand for real estate business.
●The number of HNWIs in India is expected to be double over next 10 years 137% in
Mumbai alone, hence DLF expanding its business targeting such people by investing in
multiplexes, express highways, airports etc
● India has considerably huge pool of educated and cheap labour therefore DLF may
invest in project targeting educated youths and on the other hand taking advantage of
cheap labour.

External Factor-
Micro-Factor-- DLF
DLF’s
1) COMPETITOR
Major competitors of DLF are: Oberoi Reality, Prestige Group, Godrej Properties, Sobha
Developers, Omaxe Ltd, Parsvanath, K Raheja Group, Ambuja Reality etc. In order to
compete with competitors, DLF
●Improved operational cash flow—By changing the mindset from maximization of
realization to maximization of volumes
●Reduced the capital intensity of business—By shifting the strategy from ‘Land
Banking’ to ‘Banking on Land’
●Monetization of non-core assets—By de-leveraging through sales of assets like hotels,
offices and infusion of private equity at individual project level.

2) Marketing and Promotion

The marketing and promotions experts continually develop exciting plans regarding the
marketing of the apartments and commercial spaces.
● Several fun activities are designed to increase the shopper traffic and facilitate tenant
sales at malls.
● The marketing team also conducts extensive activities to promote the apartments by
targeting the target segment according to the income to the income, and other parameters.
● Promotions in the form of putting up stalls in the property expo, tie ups with agencies
are some of the commonly followed techniques in this area.

3) Retailers
● Given the scarcity of quality retail, DLF enjoys the benefit of a portfolio of premium
locations across the country and rush by large retailers.
● DLF envisages to introduce a new retail infrastructure to cater to the need for shopping
malls and commercial centers across all segments and all places in India.
● All major retail players, including new entrants pitch aggressively for space in DLF
malls. They operate under two subcategories: a) Sale: Commercial complexes and
smaller malls, b) Lease: Lease larger malls.

4) Consumers

6|Page
 In order to meet its consumers present needs in the changing business environment DLF
took several lucrative initiatives:
● The ‘Newꞌ Business Model Approach. In 2006, the company adopted to a new business
model to cover all the aspects of reality sector consumer in detail.
● The new business models is divided into four important components: Design and
Development Management → Retail Management and Operational Leasing → Strategic
Marketing and Promotions → Property Management.
● DLF Reality project team collaborates with world class architectural firms to create
unparallel home, retail spaces which includes shopping malls and integrated
developments.
● The design of the apartments undergo several serious scrutiny and checks within the
company in various divisions like quality, strength etc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

7|Page
 a) https://fourweekmba.com/apple-distribution-strategy/
b) https://www.apple.com/apple-events/september-2019/
c) https://neilpatel.com/blog/7-key-strategies-that-you-must-learn-from-apples-marketing/
d) https://www.mbaskool.com/marketing-mix/products/17357-iphone.html
e) https://www.marketing91.com/marketing-strategy-apple-iphone/
f) https://titanwebmarketingsolutions.com/4-powerful-ps-need-know-apples-marketing-
mix/
g) https://mpk732t22015.wordpress.com/2015/09/20/how-does-apple-promote-their-
iphones/

8|Page
INTRODUCTION
The word Nuisance is derived from French word ‘Nuire’ which means to annoy or hurt. It is an
unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of a land. Under normal circumstances, a
person is entitled to the full and reasonable enjoyment and use of his property tangible,
intangible, movable, or immovable, whatsoever. This being his legal right cannot be taken away
without lawful justification. Contrary to the provided protection if someone unlawfully interferes
with this entitlement of a person he/ she commits tort of nuisance.
Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person’s use and enjoyment of land, or of some right
over, or in connection with it. Hence it is an injury or inconvenience faced by a person in the use
of his property because of his property because of another person who unreasonably uses his
own property in a way which negatively affects the former.
According to Stephens “Nuisance is anything done to the hurt or annoyance of the lands,
tenements, of another and not amounting to trespass.”
According to Salmond “The wrong of nuisance consists in causing or allowing without lawful
justification the escape of any deleterious thing from his land or from elsewhere into land in

9|Page
possession of the plaintiff, e.g. water, fumes, smoke, gas, noise, heat, vibration, electricity,
disease, germs, animals.”
Kinds of Nuisance
Nuisance as a tort is further categorized into two types- Private Nuisance and Public Nuisance
both have their own areas of actions and types of damages.
Private Nuisance where the actions of defendant are “causing a substantial and unreasonable
interference with a claimant’s land or his/ her use or enjoyment of that land”
Public Nuisance, where the defendant’s actions “materially affects the reasonably comfort and
convenience of life of a class”

 Public Nuisance – In simple terms, Public Nuisance is defined as an unreasonable and

unlawful act of the defendant that causes substantial inconvenience and legal injury to the
people at large. It comes into play when by the act of the defendant; a mass of people is
affected negatively.
Public Nuisance comes under the domain of criminal acts under the Indian laws. The
reason behind placing this tort in criminal aspects is that it is committed against the
public at large violating any of their legal rights.
Section 268 of the IPC defines Public Nuisance as “An act or illegal omission which
causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the people in general who dwell, or
occupy property, in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, objection danger
or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right”
Thus any act which seriously interferes with the health safety comfort and convenience of the
public generally or which tend to degrade public morals come under Public Nuisance.
Private Nuisance
It affects an individual rather than the world at large. It gives the affected person a claim of
“Right in Personam”. It occurs when the action of defendant affects only the plaintiff in his own
enjoyment of land and property and no one else. Technically, when a person does an act that
affects another person, and prevents the latter from exercising full rights over his own property.
It does not affect any other person save the plaintiff.
The plaintiff can thus ask for unliquidated damages and considering the seriousness of injury, the
same are decided and awarded to him.
Essentials of Private Nuisance

 Unlawful or Unreasonable Interference – Interference that cause damage to the

property of the plaintiff or any discomfort regarding the enjoyment of the property by the
plaintiff. Every interference doesn’t amount to nuisance, interference should be
reasonable.

10 | P a g e
 Radhey Shyam v. Guru Prasad1
Facts- Gur Prasad and another had filled a suit against Radhey shyam and others for a
permanent injunction to restrain them from installing and running a flour mill in their
premises. It was alleged that the mill was causing nuisance to the plaintiff, who was residing
on the first floor of the same premises. The plaintiff was losing peace on account of noises
generated by the flour mill and it was also affecting their health severely.
Judgment - It was held that by keeping the mill in residential area is had created nuisance for
the plaintiff and affected his health as well. The plaintiff was entitled to an injunction against
the defendant.

 Such Interference causes a legal injury to the plaintiff only – In this interference can
be used in many ways as follows:
1. Injury to property – When there is an unauthorized interference with someone
else’s property via some objects, whether tangible or intangible, which causes
damage to the property will be treated as a nuisance.

2. Interference with the right of support of land and buildings – Person has a
natural right to have his land being supported by his neighbor and therefore if we
remove any support lateral or beneath is causing a nuisance. This natural right is only
available in case of land and not in buildings.

3. Injury to comfort or health – When there is substantial interference with the

comfort and convenience of using the premises will be constituted as a nuisance. If
there is just a small interference causing inconvenience to the neighbors, only then it
would be considered as a nuisance.

 Damages - Unlike trespass which is actionable, in case of a nuisance it needs to be

proved that damage has been incurred due to the nuisance. In case of public damage, if a
person proves he has been affected more than what general public has suffered then only
he will be entitled to special damages otherwise not. In case of a Private nuisance, the
damage is one of the essentials but the law often presumes it.

Fay v. Prentice2
Facts - A declaration in case stated that the defendant, being possessed of a messuage
adjoining a garden of the plaintiff, erected a cornice upon his messuage, projecting over
the garden, by means whereof rain-water flowed from the cornice into the garden, and
damaged the same and the plaintiff had been incommoded in the possession and
enjoyment of his garden.
Judgment - It was held that the erection of the cornice was a nuisance from which the
law would infer injury to the plaintiff and that he was entitled to maintain an action in

1
AIR 1978 ALL.86
2
(1854) 1 C.B. 828

11 | P a g e
 respect thereof, without proof that rain had fallen between the period of the erection of
the cornice and the commencement of the action.

Defences Related to Nuisance

A number of defences have been pleaded in an action for nuisance. Some of the defences have
been recognized by the courts as valid defences and other have been rejected.
Valid Defences
1. Prescriptive Right - Prescriptive right are those right which one does not originally
have but acquires by constant exercise and lack of opposition from others. For example
in case of private property I have been using a part of the property or exposing to some
nuisance for twenty continuous year without objection, it is assumed that owner of the
property has waived his/her rights. In case of government property the rights are acquired
after thirty years. A right acquired by prescription is a defence against nuisance.

Three things are necessary to establish a right by prescription:

1. Use and occupation or enjoyment.
2. The identity of the thing enjoyed.
3. That it should be adverse to the rights of some other person.
Sturges v. Bridgman3
Facts -The claimant, a doctor, moved house and on the premises, he bought and built a shed
in his garden to carry out his private practice within.  His shed was on the boundary of the
property and happened to be next door to a confectioner.  The confectioner had produced
sweets in his kitchen for many years before the doctor had moved in.  The doctor alleged that
the noise of the confectioner grinding his pestle and mortar was clearly audible from his shed
and that this disrupted his amenity in the form of his enjoyment of his land.
Judgment - It was held that there was a nuisance, and the fact that the doctor had ‘moved to
the nuisance’ was no defence to the nuisance itself.  Nor was there an easement acquired by the
confectioner through long usage that entitled him to continue with his actions.  What constitutes
a nuisance was to be decided on a case to case basis, and it is necessary to consider the particular
locality itself.  What is not a nuisance in one area may well be a nuisance in another and it would
be unjust if the nuisance maker had been permitted to continue with the nuisance indefinitely and
without power of law to interrupt if this was to be considered a right acquired by long usage.
2. Statutory Authority - Where a statute has authorized the doing of a particular act or the
use of land in a particular way, all remedies whether by way of indictment or action, are
taken away; provided that every reasonable precaution consistent with the exercise of the
statutory powers has been taken. Statutory authority may be either absolute or
conditional.

3
(1879) 11 Ch D 852

12 | P a g e
In case of absolute authority, the statute allows the act notwithstanding the fact that it must
necessarily cause a nuisance or any other form of injury.
In case of conditional authority the State allows the act to be done only if it can be without
causing nuisance or any other form of injury, and thus it calls for the exercise of due care and
caution and due regard for private rights.
3. Sensitive Plaintiff - Nuisance is something which would be found annoying by a
reasonable person. A reasonable person is one who is understanding and tolerant of
everybody and reasonable interference. A person who is unduly sensitive and gets
affected where a reasonable person in his position would not have been is called Sensitive
person. For example – if a person is preparing for his exams and has the habit of
preparing in pin drop silence stands disturbed by his neighbor’s parking in and taking out
of the car, and complains of it would be a sensitive plaintiff. His special position even
makes him susceptible to common everyday or legally permitted sounds. This law does
not ask to take care of the sensitive plaintiff, even if the sensitive plaintiff is disturbed.
Your actions must not breach the reasonable person’s standards.
Rovinson v. Kilvert4
Facts - The defendants operated a factory which made paper boxes.  This required the
factory to be continually warm and dry to ensure that the paper boxes were in good
condition.  The claimant rented the ground floor and used this area to store special brown
paper.  The heat from the defendant’s factory damaged this brown paper, which was
unusually sensitive to heat, and the claimant sued in nuisance.
Judgment - The claim was dismissed as there was no nuisance.  The conditions in the
factory were not particularly unusual, and the claimant’s operation of the factory in these
conditions was not unlawful.  The defendants had acted as reasonable tenants of their
property.  It had been shown that the heat from the factory would not have damaged ordinary
paper.  Instead the defendant’s brown paper happened to be unusually sensitive to the heat,
and it was this which caused the damage rather than anything that the defendants had done
wrong.  Accordingly, this could not be considered a nuisance caused by the defendants. 
Where one carries on an unusually delicate trade, they cannot then complain because they are
injured by the defendant’s carrying on their lawful business on their property if this would
not have injured anything but an unusually delicate trade. 
Invalid Defences
1. Nuisance Due to acts of Others – Sometimes, The act of two or more persons, acting
independently of each other, may cause nuisance although the act of any one of them
alone would not be so. An action can be brought against any of them and it is no defence
that the act of defendant alone would not be a nuisance, and the nuisance was caused
when other had also acted in same way.
Thorpe v. Brumfitt5

4
(1889) 41 CH D 88
5
(1873) L.R. 8 Ch. 650

13 | P a g e
 Facts - P was the owner of an inn, the yard of which was approached by a passage over the
adjoining property, belonging to M. P and M agreed to change their boundary and replace the old
passage with a new one. In accordance with the agreement, in 1854, M conveyed to P a small
strip of land reaching across the end of the new passage where it entered the yard and granted P
and his heirs and assigns rights of way at all times and for all purposes along the passage running
between the conveyed piece of land and the street. P re-leased his rights of way over the old
passage. The plaintiff was the lessee of P’s inn and yard. The defendants were M’s tenants,
occupying the warehouses on his property.  They allowed carts and wagons to remain stationary
in the passage while loading and unloading and obstructed the access to the plaintiff’s yard.

Judgment - It was held that the necessity of the business of the defendants did not give them the
right to occupy the passage by stationary obstructions when the other person having a right of
way needed to pass and The right of way was not a right in gross, but appurtenant to the
property, occupied by the plaintiff, so his lease gave him the right to its enjoyment.

2. Public Good – It is no defence to say that act which is good for general public can cause
nuisance against few person. Law doesn’t sacrifice single right for nourishing bunch of
rights.

Adam v. Ursell6

Facts - A house owner complained that his neighbor’s fish and chip shop was emitting odors
which impinged on the enjoyment of his house.

Judgment – It was held that the injunction would mean a great hardship to defendants and his
poor customers.

3. Plaintiff coming to Nuisance – It is no defence that the plaintiff himself came to the
place of nuisance. Example If A is carrying on a nuisance activity at his premises and B
occupies a home adjacent to A, A cannot claim that B is coming to nuisance and he is
liable for the discomfort caused to B.

Bills v. Halls7

Facts – In an action for nuisance for diverse noisome, noxious, and offensive vapor, fumes,
smell and stenches out off defendant’s tallow-chandlery.

Judgment – It was held to be no defence that business had been continuing for three years
before the plaintiff came to that place.

4. Reasonable care – Using of reasonable care can’t be pleaded as a valid defence. Legal
duty should be followed strictly. Law generally does not recognize the excuse which
amounts to violation of right itself.

6
(1913) 1 Ch. 269
7
(1838) 4 Bing N.C. 183

14 | P a g e
 Rapier v. London tramways Co. 8

Facts – Noise and the smell from stabling for large no. of horses (used to pull trams) amount
to nuisance which caused from defendants stable constructed to accommodate 200 horses to
pull trams

Judgment – It was held that the defendant cannot take the defence that he take maximum
possible care to minimize the annoyance and defendants were held liable.

CONCLUSION

The Law of Torts is uncodified so does the Law of Nuisance it is also uncodified. As law of
torts has gone through much interpretation and many no. of judgments law of nuisance is also
gone through the same. It happens most commonly in a person’s day to day life and decision
regarding the same base on the case to case basis. Courts in the matter of nuisance have taken
many principles as well as decision from common law system along with making their own
precedents by giving a sound system of law and ensuring fairness and well being of the
parties and the society at large.

8
(1893) 2 Ch. 588

15 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bangia R.K, Law of Torts, ALA 24th 2017
Jain Ashok, Law of Torts, ASCENT, 8th 2016
https://lawnn.com/public-nuisance-private-nuisance/
https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/
https://swarb.co.uk/rapier-v-london-tramways-co-1893/
https://lawnn.com/public-nuisance-private-nuisance/
https://www.legalbites.in/nuisance-tort-law/
http://www.preservearticles.com/2012011020490/

16 | P a g e