Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

S. K. Bahl vs Uday Pratap Singh on 12 July, 2019

Bench: Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

                                                                                                     1

     ITEM NO.45                                   COURT NO.8                   SECTION XIV

                                     S U P R E M E C O U R T O F          I N D I A
                                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

     Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.7278/2019

     (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-10-2018
     in CONC No.475/2017 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)

     S. K. BAHL                                                                 Petitioner(s)

                                                         VERSUS

     UDAY PRATAP SINGH & ANR.                                                   Respondent(s)

     (IA No.39279/2019-EXEMPTION                       FROM    FILING    C/C   OF    THE    IMPUGNED
     JUDGMENT)

     Date : 12-07-2019 This matter was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
                              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN

     For Petitioner(s)                    Mr. Ramesh Mohan Sinha, Adv.
                                          Mr. Prateek Mohan Sinha, Adv.
                                          Ms. Manju Jetley, AOR

     For Respondent(s)                    Ms. Garima Prashad, AOR
                                          Mr. Mohit Kumar Bansal, Adv.

                               UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                  O R D E R

In LPA No.419/2013 following consent order was passed on 03.09.2013 by the Division Bench of the High Court setting aside the order dated 20.05.2013 passed by the Single Judge in Writ Petition (Civil) No.16305 of 2004:

“(i) Demand towards unearned increase shall be withdrawn by DDA;

(ii) Upon all owners having purchased interest in the land Digitally signed by MUKESH KUMAR Date: 2019.07.15 comprising Plot No.135, Block K-1, Chittranjan Park, 18:54:01 IST Reason: New Delhi, applying for conversion of the lease-hold tenure into free-hold tenure and paying the misuse charges together with interest thereon @ 9% per annum from the date when demand was raised till payment was made and additionally paying the conversion charges +  2 33.333% thereof and such other amounts as are payable to DDA as per demand letter dated March 09, 2005; with ground rent and interest thereon updated till when application for conversion is filed, upon satisfaction by DDA to the genuineness of documents submitted, the conveyance deed would be executed in favour of the applicants conveying free-hold tenure in their names of the plot in question.

(iii) With respect to the misuse charges and past dues, DDA would be entitled to interest @ 9% per annum from the date when the respective amounts became due and payable and till when payment was/is made.

(iv) With respect to the amounts paid by the appellant or any other purchaser(s) of part interest in the land, adjustment would be given by DDA and if any excess amount is found paid the appellant as also the co- applicants would be entitled to a refund thereof with 9% interest per annum.

It may be mentioned that by communication dated 09.03.2005, the DDA had found that following charges were required to be deposited in order to get the property converted to free-hold from lease-hold:

(In Rs.) “1. Misuse charges (Provisionally) 73,89,895.00 31.11.90 to 16.9.2002

2. Restoration charges @ Rs.300 psqm 31,350.00

3. De-sealing Charges 15,000.00

4. Addl. Charges/Maintenance Charges 75,000.00 16.09.2002 to 8.12.2003 (Provisional)

5. Unearned Increase Charges 42,35,222.00

6. Ground Rent upto 24.1.2005 22,695.00

7. Int. on Ground Rent upto 31.12.2004 18,061.00 ____________________________ Total Rs. (Provisional) 1,17,87,223.00” ____________________________"

Since by virtue of one of the consent terms, the component of unearned increase was not to be charged, the liability would stand reduced by Rs.42,35,222/-.

It is submitted by the petitioner that as against the amount so demanded, the petitioner and the co-purchasers have in all deposited a sum of Rs.88,93,670/- and, as such, there would be no impediment for the DDA to consider the application for conversion from lease-hold to free-hold.

Learned counsel for the respondent has accepted that money in excess of what is actually due from the petitioner and the co- purchasers has been lying in deposit with the Authority.

We therefore direct the Authority to consider the matter with regard to the issue of conversion of the property from lease-hold to free-hold. The petitioner shall appear before the Authority along with all the documents on 16.07.2019 and place the same for consideration by the Authority.

The respondent Authority shall take a decision on the application for conversion immediately and preferably within two weeks from 16.07.2019. The order in question shall be placed on record of the present proceedings.

List this matter for further consideration on 26.08.2019.

       (MUKESH NASA)                                   (NISHA TRIPATHI)
       COURT MASTER                                     BRANCH OFFICER