Delhi District Court
Mak Data Pvt. Ltd vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 29 October, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SH. KULDEEP NARAYAN,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE - 18, (CENTRAL),
TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
Suit No. 146/14
1. Mak Data Pvt. Ltd.
(A company incorporated under the
Indian Companies Act, 1956),
Having its registered office
at E-58, Greater Kailash Part-I
New Delhi-110048.
..........plaintiffs
VERSUS
1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Chandni Chowk, Town Hall,
Delhi-110006
2. The Executive Engineer
Building Department, Central Zone,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi .......... Defendants
ORDER
29/10/2014 This order shall decide an application under order 12 rule 6 CPC moved on behalf of the plaintiff. The defendants filed reply to the application. I heard arguments on both sides and perused the material available on record
2. The plaintiff filed suit for recovery of Rs. 18,51,980/- along with interest against the defendants. The relevant facts as per the plaint are; that the plaintiff requested for permission to allow Mixed Land Used Suit No. 146/14 Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors 1/4 (MLU) for running a guest house in the premise no. E-58, Greater Kailash- I, New Delhi -110048 in view of the guidelines issued vide notification dated 20.11.2006- MPD -2021. The plaintiff deposited Rs. 26,12,520/- with the defendants vide GR no. 28094 dated 12.03.2007 under the Self Assessment Regularisation Scheme of MCD; that subsequently the defendants demanded permission fee of Rs. 51,85,100/- vide letter dated 13.04.2007 bearing number D-97 which was paid by the plaintiff and the plaintiff was permitted for Mixed Land Use for running a guest house vide letter dated 19.04.2007. Thereafter plaintiff was also granted permission for change of permission scheme to one time payment scheme for running the guest house activity vide letter dated 26.03.2008 on additional deposit of Rs. 14,39,346/- which was deposited on 27.03.2008 vide GR no. 232088 and consequentially plaintiff was issued necessary revised permission by MCD ; that at the time of availing benefit of relaxed FAR, due to inadvertent mistake in calculation while depositing the amount of Rs. 26,12,520/- on 12.03.2007, plaintiff had deposited excess amount of Rs. 18,06,020/-; that the plaintiff perused and requested the defendants for refund of the excess amount of Rs. 18,06,020/- and was assured that the aforesaid refund was under process. The aforesaid excess amount of Rs. 18,06,020/- has also been unambiguously acknowledged by the defendant, having scrutinized the revised regularisation plan and calculation sheets submitted by the plaintiff. The defendants acknowledged in writing in their office record on 05.06.2007 and 04.07.2007 for refund of the excess amount of Rs. 18,06,020/- to the plaintiff. However, the same has not yet been refunded to the plaintiff, hence the present suit.
Suit No. 146/14 Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors 2/4
3. The defendants contested the suit by filing written statement taking preliminary objections that the suit is barred by law of limitation and plaintiff has no cause of action to file the suit. It is also stated that the plaintiff deposited the excess amount as per its own calculation and the defendant had not asked the plaintiff to deposit any such excess amount. In reply on merit other averments have been denied. The defendant also filed status report along with photocopies of other documents.
4. Having heard the submissions and perused the entire material available on record, I find substance in the contentions of the Counsel for the plaintiff.
5. A perusal of averments as contained in para 3 to 5 and 7 of reply on merits in the written statement reveal that there is no denial on the part of the defendants with regard to deposit of excess amount of Rs. 18,06,020/- by the plaintiff. As per the office note dated 05.06.2007 filed by the defendants an excess amount of Rs 18,06,020/- was processed for approval to be refunded to the plaintiff. As per status report filed by the defendant on 24.01.2012 and 16.02.2012 and letter no. D/587/EE(B)II/B- II/CNZ/12 dated 15.02.2012, it is categorically mentioned therein that an amount of Rs. 17,78,845/- was found deposited by the plaintiff in excess of actual requirement on account of compounding fee for regularisation which was found legitimate and in terms of directions of higher authorities, necessary verifications were being carried out to refund the excess amount.
6. In view of the afore-mentioned circumstances, there are Suit No. 146/14 Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors 3/4 categorical admissions on part of the defendants to refund a sum of Rs. 18,06,620/- to the plaintiff which after scrutiny, came to be Rs. 17,78,845/-. The only objection raised by the defendant pertains to the suit being barred by law of limitation which holds no merit in view of the law laid down in M/s Niagara Hotels & Builders (P) Ltd V. Union of India 1997 (40) DRJ 30 wherein it was held that the period of limitation for filing such type of suit for recovery would not be governed by Sub Section 2 of Section 478 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act but would be governed by the normal law of limitation under the Limitation Act, 1963 which is 3 years. In view of the entire set of circumstances, the suit filed on 03.06.2010 is within limitation.
7. Accordingly the application U/o 12 Rule 6 CPC moved on behalf of the plaintiff is allowed. The suit is decreed with costs. The defendants are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 17,78,845/- to the plaintiff forthwith alongwith interest @ 6% per annum w.e.f. 05.06.2007 till its realisation.
Decree Sheet be prepared.
File be sent to Record Room after due completion.
Dated: 29/10/2014 (Kuldeep Narayan)
Announced in open Court. Additional District judge-18, (Central)
Court No. 349, Tis Hazari Courts/Delhi.
Suit No. 146/14 Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors 4/4
Suit No. 146/14 Mak Data Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors 5/4