Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Delhi High Court

Ganga Saran Memorial Education vs Delhi Development Authority on 6 October, 2009

Author: Sanjiv Khanna

Bench: Sanjiv Khanna

17
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+     W.P.(C) 23137/2005

      GANGA SARAN MEMORIAL EDUCATION     ... Petitioner
                    Through   Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
                              Sumit Bansal and Mr. Manish Paliwal,
                              Advocates.

                   Versus

      D.D.A.               ..... Respondent
                          Through      Mr. Rajiv Bansal, Adv. for DDA.
                                       Mr. Hitender Kapur, Adv. for R-2.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

               ORDER

% 06.10.2009

1. By the allotment letter dated 6th August, 2002, a plot measuring 800 square mtrs. was allotted to the petitioner for a nursery school in Ram Vihar colony. Clause 22 of the demand-cum-allotment letter dated 6th August, 2002, stipulated as under:-

"22. If the above terms and conditions are acceptable to you the acceptance thereof with attested undertaking be sent to the undersigned alongwith the bank challan in favour of DDA for Rs. 17,16,230/- Land premium Rs._16,74,327/- Ground Rent Rs. 41,858/- and documentation charges Rs.45/- within 60 days from the date of issue of the allotment cum demand letter. The said amount WPC NO.23137/2005 Page 1 can also be deposited in the bank counter situated in DDA's office complex and copy of the same may be sent to this office for having deposited the demand alongwith acceptance letter/undertaking within 60 days from the date of issue of demand cum allotment letter. Within 60 days of issue of demand cum allotment letter, the allottee shall be required to make the entire payment. Thereafter, 18% interest shall be chargeable up to 6 months from the date of issue of the demand cum allotment letter including the tenure of 60 days.

2. The petitioner wrote letter dated 20th November, 2002 asking for clarification with regard to the pole, which was located in the plot. Another letter in this regard was written on 13th February, 2003. The respondent DDA did not respond to the said letters and cancelled the allotment vide letter dated 8th April, 2003. This letter was sent by speed post to the petitioner but was returned back with the report "that no person by the said name resides at the said address".

3. The petitioner thereafter on 18th June, 2003 deposited Rs.17,16,230/, but the interest was not deposited.

3. Counsel for the respondent DDA submits that the petitioner did not deposit the amount as per the contractual terms mentioned in the clause- 22 of the letter dated 6th August, 2002 and, therefore, has lost their right/claim to allotment. He relies upon decision taken in the case of Rahul WPC NO.23137/2005 Page 2 Dhaka.

4. Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, relies upon clause 22 of the letter dated 6th August, 2002 and submits that the said clause does not state that time cannot be extended after six months. Clause 22 it is stated stipulates that interest @ 18% shall be chargeable up to six months from the date of issue of the demand-cum-allotment letter but consequences are not provided. He relies upon the decision taken in the cases of Nijdham Parental and Welfare Society and Ray Bahadur Raghubir Singh Educational Society.

5. There is apparently conflict between the decisions in the case of Rahul Dhaka and Nijdham Parental and Welfare Society. It is the contention of the petitioner that till the middle of 2003, the respondent DDA were condoning defaults of belated payments with interest and the decision in the case of Rahul Dhaka was taken sometimes in 2005.

6. These aspects require consideration by the DDA. The respondents will accordingly re-examine the matter and file an additional affidavit clearly stating their stand and pointing out whether the petitioner is entitled to benefit of extension of time keeping in view the decisions and policy of the DDA during the relevant period i.e. up to end of June, 2003. The above said affidavit will be filed within a period of one month from WPC NO.23137/2005 Page 3 today.

7. The above order is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondent No.2, the cooperative society.

Relist on 4th February, 2010.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.


      OCTOBER 06, 2009
      NA




      WPC NO.23137/2005                                              Page 4