Supreme Court of India

Ghaziabad Development Authority vs Ramesh Chandra Pandiya on 29 January, 2009

Supreme Court of India
Ghaziabad Development Authority vs Ramesh Chandra Pandiya on 29 January, 2009
Author: ………………………J.
Bench: R.V. Raveendran, Aftab Alam
                                  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                          CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6049 OF 2002

GHAZIABAD                     DEVELOPMENT                        .......APPELLANT(S)
AUTHORITY

                                                   Versus

RAMESH CHANDRA PANDIYA                                           .....RESPONDENT(S)



                                      ORDER

The appellant allotted plot No. E-170 at Nehru Nagar measuring 167.44 sq.

mt. vide allotment letter dated 5.6.1985, the price being Rs.37,842/-. The appellant send

letters demanding payment of instalments which had become due and called upon the

respondent to enter into a lease deed and take possession of the allotted site. The said

allotment was cancelled on 16.3.1990 on the ground that the respondent had failed to

take possession.

2. The respondent requested withdrawal of the cancellation and restoration of

the allotment, vide letter dated 17.3.1990. By letter dated 19.4.1990, the appellant

restored the allotment subject to payment of restoration fee and subject to the condition

that it would be the responsibility of the respondent to take possession and he will not

seek change of plot. The respondent, however, applied for allotment of alternative plot

on 15.9.1994, alleging that the municipal authorities had laid a sewer line on the plot

and that some

……2.

-2-

part of the plot was also encroached. The appellant thereafter allotted an alternative

plot (Plot No. 6/167, Vaishali) measuring 250.77 sq.mt. on 31.1.1996 and demanded

payment of Rs.3,39,179/- after adjusting Rs.56,820/- which had been paid by the

respondent towards the earlier allotment. The price charged for the Vaishali site is

stated to be about Rs.1400/- per sq. mt.

3. Feeling aggrieved by the said demand, the respondent approached the State

Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P. seeking a direction to the appellant to

deliver the Vaishali plot at the original price of allotment which was about Rs.226/- per

sq.mt. He also prayed for damages as also interest on the amount that was deposited by

him for the Nehru Nagar plot. The State Commission by its order dated 29.3.2001

allowed the complaint. It directed the appellant to deliver the Vaishali plot measuring

250.77 sq.mt. at the original allotment price of Rs.226/- per sq.mt. It further directed

the appellant to pay interest at 18% per annum on the amount deposited by the

respondent towards the cost of Nehru Nagar plot. It also awarded Rs.38,000/- as

compensation to respondent and also directed the appellant to pay the escalation

towards the cost of construction of the house, worked out on the basis of cost of

construction index in U.P. in the year 1985 and the year of delivery of possession.

…….3.

-3-

4. The said order was challenged by the appellant before the National

Commission. The National Commission deleted the direction for payment of

compensation of Rs.38,000/- and the direction that appellant should pay escalation in

the cost of construction. It, however, affirmed the direction for delivery of Vaishali plot

at the price of Rs.226/- and the direction for payment of interest at 18% per annum on

the amount earlier deposited by the respondent in regard to Nehru Nagar plot. The

National Commission relied on its earlier decision in HUDA Vs. Darsh Kumar (Revision

Petition No.1197/1998 decided on 31.8.2001) for awarding interest at such rate. The

said order is under challenge.

5. Appellant submitted that the decision of the National Commission in Darsh

Kumar has been reversed by this Court in Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs.

Darsh Kumar & Ors., (2005) 9 SCC 449. The appellant also contended that the

cancellation of allotment in the year 1990 was as a consequence of breaches and was in

accordance with the terms of allotment and the Rules. It was pointed out that as per the

terms of letter of allotment, instalments of Rs.3784.20 had to be paid by the respondent

on 4.12.85, 4.6.86, 4.12.86, 4.6.87, 4.12.87, 4.6.88, 4.12.88 and 4.6.89, apart from

executing the lease deed and taking possession. It was stated that the respondent did

not enter into any lease agreement and

…..4.

-4-

take possession nor pay the instalments as and when they fell due in terms of the said

allotment letter. It was contended that on account of the delay and breaches on the part

of the respondent in executing the lease deed and taking possession, the plot was

encroached subsequent to the date of allotment leading to unnecessary complications. It

was submitted that the appellant was entitled to charge the prevailing price for the

alternative plot.

6. The respondent denies the allegation of breach by him. According to the

respondent, the allotted plot was under encroachment even when he went to inspect it

and, therefore, he could not take possession. He also stated that possession of

alternative site at Vaishali has been delivered to him in the year 2008, when he executed

the order of the State Commission.

7. However, after the matter was argued for some time, the learned counsel for

respondents on instructions, submitted that to put an end to the controversy, the

respondent was willing to pay the prevailing allotment price of Rs.1400/- per sq. mt. in

regard to the Vaishali plot and will not press the claim for interest on the amount paid

for the earlier allotted site.

……5.

-5-

8. Learned counsel for the appellant is not in a position to give any acceptable

reason to deny the respondent the benefit of the alternative plot that has been delivered

to him, when he is even willing to pay the price demanded. We are of the view that

having regard to the factual background, neither party shall be entitled to interest.

9. We, therefore, allow this appeal in part and modify the order of the State

Commission and National Commission as follows:

(a) The respondent will be entitled to retain plot No.6/167 at Vaishali measuring

250.77 sq.mt. allotted to him. Consequently, the appellant shall issue necessary letter of

allotment/communication regularising and confirming the allotment.

(b) The cost of the said Vaishali plot shall be paid at the rate of Rs.1400/- per sq.

mt. The price calculated at the said rate less the amount already deposited by the

respondent shall be paid by the respondent to the appellant within three months.

(c) A sum of Rs.1,09,160/- is said to have been paid by the appellant to the

respondent towards interest etc. in terms of

….6.

-6-

the order of the Commission. The said amount shall also be refunded by the respondent

to the appellant within three months in addition to the difference in price as a condition

precedent for confirming the allotment.

(d) Failing such payments, the appellant shall be entitled to cancel the allotment

and take back possession.

(e) The appellant will not be entitled to charge any interest on the balance amount

due for the Vaishali plot. Nor will the respondent be entitled to any interest on the

amount already paid. Neither party will be entitled to any amount by way of

compensation or costs.

(f) On payment of amounts as aforesaid, the appellant will execute/issue the

necessary documents of title in regard to the Vaishali plot at the cost of the respondent.

(g)       Parties to bear their respective costs.



                                                ...........................J.
                                                ( R.V. RAVEENDRAN )



New Delhi;                               ...........................J.
January 29, 2009.            ( AFTAB ALAM )