Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Sangeeta Jain . vs Yamuna Expressway Industrial ... on 2 March, 2022
Bench: Sanjiv Khanna, Bela M. Trivedi
M A NO. 1712 OF 2021
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1712 OF 2021
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8318-8319 OF 2016
SANGEETA JAIN & ORS. APPLICANT(S)/
APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Learned senior counsel for the respondent has handed over a cheque bearing No. 002691 dated 28th February 2022 drawn on ICICI Bank in the name of the original applicant(s) for Rs. 47,65,690/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakh Sixty Five Thousand Six Hundred and Ninety Only) to the leaned counsel for the applicant(s).
Learned senior counsel for the respondent has drawn our attention to the letter dated 12th October 2020 requiring the applicant(s) to submit the photocopies of the PAN Card(s) and cancelled cheque to enable them to refund the money deposited. The request was repeated vide letter dated 23rd May 2021. The Signature Not Verified applicant(s), it is stated, did not comply with the said requests. Digitally signed by JAGDISH KUMAR Date: 2022.03.04 16:55:55 IST Reason:
Learned senior counsel for the respondent on instructions 1 M A NO. 1712 OF 2021 accepts that the letter dated 29th October 2021 was issued, but under a bona fide mistake and erroneously, without knowledge of the order of this Court dated 22nd November 2019. The position was clarified and the applicant(s) was informed vide letter dated 7th January 2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant(s) has again reiterated their prayer for allotment of the plot. We reject the said prayer for a simple reason that there has been a novation of the original contract. On the applicant(s) request and prayer, this Court had passed the order dated 22nd November 2019. Once a contract is novated, it ceases to exist, and rights and obligations are governed under and in terms of the order dated 22 nd November 2019. We cannot compel the respondent to adhere to the terms of the earlier contract, unless they agree.
The applicant(s), therefore, would be entitled to payment in terms of the order dated 22nd November 2019.
Leaned counsel for the applicant(s) states that they had already furnished photocopies of the PAN Card(s) and bank account details to the learned counsel for the respondent(s). No such proof and details are on record. However, to cut short the controversy we direct the applicant(s) to furnish the photocopies of the PAN Card(s) and the cancelled cheque to the learned counsel for the respondent within two days.
TDS as applicable on interest, and not under Section 206AA, would be deducted and the balance amount would be paid to the applicant(s) via electronic transfer within a period of four weeks 2 M A NO. 1712 OF 2021 from today. The balance amount payable would include the stamp duty paid/deposited by the applicant(s) and the interest due on the stamp duty in terms of the order dated 22nd November 2019. The applicant(s) would also be entitled to cost of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) which would be included in the amount to be paid in terms of this order. The miscellaneous application is disposed of.
……………………………………………. .J. [SANJIV KHANNA] ……………………………………………. .J. [ BELA M. TRIVEDI] NEW DELHI 2ND MARCH, 2022 3 M A NO. 1712 OF 2021 ITEM NO.14 COURT NO.14 SECTION XVII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Miscellaneous Application No. 1712/2021 in C.A. No. 8318-8319/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-11-2019 in C.A. No. No. 8318-8319/2016 passed by the Supreme Court of India) SANGEETA JAIN Petitioner(s) VERSUS YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Respondent(s) ( IA No. 91778/2021 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS) Date : 02-03-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv.
Ms. Christi Jain, Adv.
Mr. Umang Mehta, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Singh, Adv.
Ms. Pratibha Jain, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ravindra Kumar, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Binay Kumar Das, AOR Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.
Ms. Neha Das, Adv.
Mr. R.K. Raizada, Sr. Adv. Mr. Bhakti Vardhan Singh, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The miscellaneous application is disposed of in terms of the Signed Order.
(SONIA BHASIN) (DIPTI KHURANA)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
[Signed Order is placed on the file]
4