JUDGMENT
B.N. Kirpal, J.
(1) After the payment of the entire amount, as demanded by the respondent, the petitioner had been writing a number of letters to the respondent requiring it to hand over the possession of the said plot of land. On one pretext or the other the possession was not handed over. The petitioner was at one time asked to show proof of the deposit of Rs. 8737.50 which was shown and on another occasion, he was asked to furnish a Power of Attorney. This was also done, but still the possession of the plot was not handed over.
(2) It was only vide a letter dated 4.3.86 that the petitioner was informed that he would be handed over possession of a plot measuring 325.16 sq. metres. This was followed by two other letters dated ‘.10.87 and 6.11.87 to similar effect. The Attorney of the petitioner objected to the area of the plot which was sought to be allotted, and the petitioner also represented against this vide his letter dated 22.11.88.
(3) It is thereupon that the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction that the area of the plot should not be reduced and the respondent should be directed to hand over the possession of the same to the petitioner.
(4) In the reply which has been filed by the Secretary, D.D.A. it has been stated that the area of the plot was 325,16 sq. metres and it is for this plot that the charges were recovered and that area of 1029.33 sq. metres which was written in the demand letter was due to some confusion and misunderstanding. According to the learned counsel for the respondent the payment which has been made is only in respect of 325.16 sq. metres and, therefore, if more area is sought to be allotted to the petitioner, he should pay Rs. 19,76,313.60.
(5) In our opinion, the defense sought to be put up by the respondent is absolutely untenable. It is not denied in the affidavit in reply that in the brochure the area of the plot which was indicated was 1029.33 sq. metres. The said brochure read : Area-1029.13 sq. meters; Ground Coverage-325.16; No. of Storeys-3; Total permissible floor area 975.48.
(6) The deponent on behalf of the respondent has stated that the area of the plot was shown as 325.16 sq. metres in the said brochure. He has further averred that the total area of 1029.33 sq. metres was written in the demand letter due to some confusion and misunderstanding. We have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that these averments which have been made in the affidavit are absolutely false and incorrect. In the very paragraph in which the averments have been made, the aforesaid extract from the brochure has been quoted where it is clearly indicated that the area of the plot is 1029.33 sq. metres. 325.16 sq. metres is shown as the coverage area and is not known as the area of the plot, as has been deposed by the deponent. It is well known and certainly the Dda should know it better than anybody else that 100% coverage over the ground is not allowed for constructing a nursing home. The covered area which is] permissible on a plot of land is approximately 33%, as according to the bye- laws. Therefore, on a plot area of 1029.33 sq. metres the ground area on which construction could be raised was 325.16 sq. metres and the total floor area of the three storeys which could be constructed on 325.16 sq. metres was 975.48 sq. metres. The total covered are of 975.48 sq. metres was taken into consideration while fixing the reserved price by the respondents. If the petitioner is allotted only the land measuring 325.16 sq. metres, then according to the by-laws he can construct only on 33% of this land and the covered area would be considerably reduced. This was never intended nor indicated in the brochure. The stand taken by the respondent is untenable. In the brochure it was indicated that “the plots vary in size and to help fit individual budgets they are priced considerably lower than the rates at which similarly plots have been auctioned by the DDA. The plots are to be sold only to Indians living abroad and the payment is to be made in foreign exchange.” It was further stated that special concessions would be made available to the buyers for importing equipment and the medicines for the nursing homes.
(7) In view of the aforesaid, we have no doubt in our opinion that the petitioner had paid good money and was entitled to the area of 1029 33 sq. metres and on which he could could construct a three-storeyed building covering the ground of 355.16 sq. metres and the building could have a total permissible area of 975.48 sq. metres.
(8) We are informed by the learned counsel for the respondent that after the demarcation of the plot has taken place the area actually at site is 956 sq. metres. Mandamus issued for this area.