Delhi High Court - Orders
Smt. Suman Lata Gupta vs The Registrar Cooperativesocieties ... on 8 September, 2020
Author: Hima Kohli
Bench: Hima Kohli, Subramonium Prasad
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4935/2019
SMT. SUMAN LATA GUPTA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vijay K. Jain, Advocate.
versus
THE REGISTRAR COOPERATIVESOCIETIES GOVERNMENT OF
NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sumit Vashisht, ASC (Civil),
GNCTD/R-1 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
ORDER
% 08.09.2020 HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING.
CM APPL. 21910/2020 (for direction)
1. This application has been moved by the petitioner praying inter alia for advancing the date of hearing in an interim application for stay moved by her alongwith the writ petition (CM APPL. 21917/2019).
2. Mr. Vijay K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite the fact that the respondent No.2/Society had entered appearance through a counsel on 15.01.2020, no counter affidavit has been filed so far. He submits that after an N.O.C. issued by the Delhi Cooperative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. on 23.2.2012 for conversion of the subject flat from leasehold to freehold due to financial faced by her, the petitioner could not apply at the relevant time. Later on, when she did attempt to apply, the respondent No.2/Society served her with a demand letter dated 20.10.2018, calling upon her to pay an amount to the tune of Rs.1,99,450/- on several heads including construction cost, vacant land W.P.(C) 4935/2019 Page 1 of 2 charge, cost of land with interest, ground rent and insurance amount with interest along with a sum of Rs.14,43,917.48 paise raised towards amount allegedly outstanding and payable to the DCHFC. It is submitted that the petitioner had made a complaint to the respondents No. 1 & 3/RCS against the Managing Committee of the respondent No.2/Society regarding the said unlawful demand, but no action has been taken.
3. Mr. Sumit Vashisht, learned ASC (Civil) appearing for the respondents No.1 & 3/RCS states that he has filed a counter affidavit clearly stating inter alia that the petitioner has not invoked the provision of Section 70 of the Co- operative Societies Act by raising a dispute with the respondent No.2/Society which could then be referred to arbitration and therefore, the respondents No.1 & 3/RCS have no role to play in the matter.
4. As none is present on behalf of the respondent No.2/Society despite service of an advanced copy of the application on its counsel, learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to take fresh steps to serve the respondent No.2/Society directly as also through its counsel, by speed post and e-mail, returnable on 08.10.2020. Accompanying the notice to be served on the respondent No.2/Society, shall be an letter intimating the next date of hearing in the matter and a direction to the respondent No.2/Society to file its counter affidavit within two weeks, which if filed, is still not on record.
HIMA KOHLI, J.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
SEPTEMBER 08, 2020/kk W.P.(C) 4935/2019 Page 2 of 2