Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.18 seconds)
Huda And Ors vs Subhash Bansal And Ors on 7 November, 2017 cites

M/S. Roochira Ceramics vs Haryana Urban Development Authority, ... on 1 October, 1997

10. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no illegality or perversity in the findings recorded by the lower Appellate Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Roochira 7 of 10 ::: Downloaded on - 09-12-2017 01:47:15 ::: RSA No.3640 of 2010 8 Ceramic's case (supra), held that penal interest at the rate of 18% cannot be charged by the defendants-HUDA.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 18 - M L Singhal - Full Document

Mohan Dass And Ors. vs Haryana Urban Dev. Authority And Anr. on 8 May, 2007

In another judgment of this Court rendered in 2007 (3) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) page 1886-Mohan Dass vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority, this Court has held that no penal interest can be charged from the allottee and that HUDA is not entitled to charge compound interest. The appellants herein strongly resisted the grant benefit of judgment of the Supreme Court to the plaintiffs. Once a clause of conditions imposed by HUDA has been considered and interpreted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then the defendants were bound to follow the same. Hence, the defendants could not have insisted upon charging compound interest or charging penal interest @ 18% per annum; in violation of the aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court. Therefore, the impugned resumption notice was rightly held to be illegal by the lower Appellate Court and was rightly set aside.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - M Grover - Full Document
1