Court No. - 1 Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 7142 of 2010 Petitioner :- Daleep Chopra, Respondent :- State Of U.P., Thru. Prin. Secy.,Housing & Another Petitioner Counsel :- D.D. Chopra Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,D.K. Upadhyay Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J.
Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Heard Sri D.D. Chopra for the petitioner and Sri D.K. Upadhyay for the
Lucknow Development Authority.
From the own pleadings of the petitioner, it is clear that the petitioner had
been a defaulter in making payment of the amount outstanding against the
house in question, which was allotted to the petitioner under hire purchase
agreement in Gomti Nagar Extension Scheme. The demand notice has been
served upon the petitioner but on one pretext or the other, he has not deposited
the amount asked for.
Before us, learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a plea that calculation
done, is not correct and excess amount is being asked for. He also raises some
dispute regarding interest which has been imposed on the amount in question.
Sri D.K. Upadhyay appearing for the Lucknow Development Authority has
made an effort to justify the demand but we are of the view that such a
question cannot be made the subject matter of challenge in writ jurisdiction of
this Court. The petitioner being a defaulter, he is obliged to make payment of
the dues outstanding against him under the terms of the agreement alongwith
interest that has been provided therein.
We, therefore, dispose of this petition finally with the direction that the
petitioner may make a representation to the Vice Chairman, Lucknow
Development Authority within a maximum period of fifteen days from today
and if such a representation is made, the same shall be considered and decided
in accordance with law expeditiously; after affording opportunity to the
petitioner. Till the representation so made is decided no order for cancelling
allotment shall be passed.
Subject to aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 29.7.2010
vks