Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: dchfc in Meenu Tomar vs The Registrar, Cooperative Societies & ... on 24 May, 2016Matching Fragments
3. It is also an admitted position that on 8th of April 1984, the society applied to the Delhi Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'DCHFC') for grant of loan of `1.5 crores for construction of flats. A loan of `1.26 crores was sanctioned on 17th November, 1985 pursuant to a loan agreement. The society also executed a mortgage deed whereby the land allotted to the society was mortgaged with the DCHFC.
A further loan of `18 lakhs was sanctioned and released to the society against a supplementary loan agreement and a further mortgage deed was executed with the DCHFC in November, 1987.
xxx xxx xxx Regarding DCHFC loan Mr. Malik, President RWA requested all member to adopt a resolution so that the default amount of the Society, if any may be recovered from defaulters only and others are not pressurised to part with their money for no fault of their own. Accordingly, the House adopted the following resolutions :
In view of the compliance of the two subsequent awards in respect of DCHFC Ltd. Loan passed against the Society in the courts of G.G. Saxena and U.R. Kapoor respectively in the year 1998 and 2002, the present M.C. resolved that any such member can not be asked to pay extra amount than declared amount of loan even after the default by the Society towards payment of DCHFC loan if :
54. The above narration would show that according to the DCHFC in its claims, some of the persons who had taken the benefit of the loan were defaulters in repaying the loan given to it, compelling it to initiate arbitration proceedings culminating in the Award.
55. Admittedly the DCHFC initiated the recovery proceedings pursuant to the recovery certificate dated 23rd June, 2009 in the year 2009 and having quantified the recoverable amount at `1,79,48,814/- against the loanee defaulters.
56. On 31st December, 2012, the Society has submitted yet another list of what it termed as 'defaulting members' to the DCHFC. These include the private parties before us who admittedly were not defaulters as per the loan agreement or the Arbitral Awards. These parties have been so bracketed now only for the reason that they had refused to comply with the demand of the Society in terms of the resolution dated 7 th March, 2010 as they were not beneficiaries of the loan from the DCHFC. These included the private respondents in W.P.(C)No.8751/2015 as well as Meenu Tomar (through her predecessor-in-interest).
XI. Submission that the DCHFC is having a first charge over the entire project of the Society
98. It has been vehemently urged by Mr. S.K. Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for DCHFC that his client had a first charge over the entire project and therefore, any right, title or interest of any other person is subject to the rights of the DCHFC.
99. In this regard, Mr. Rajat Aneja, learned counsel for the private respondent in W.P.(C)No.8751/2015, has drawn our attention to the letter dated 11th of September 1986 communicating the following decision of the Board of Directors of the DCHFC to all societies after considering the difficulties being faced by the employees of public sector undertakings and banks etc. who raise loans for their flats in group housing societies against the security of mortgage of their flats :