THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.621 of 2007
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. J.Prabhakar, learned Senior Counsel
appearing for the appellant and Mr. Kishore Rai,
learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3.
2. Initially the writ appeal was filed by Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, which now stands substituted by Telangana Housing Board.
3. Respondents No.1 to 3 as writ petitioners No.3 to 5 had filed the related writ petition, being W.P.No.8653 of 2005, questioning the letter dated 01.03.2005 of the appellant as illegal and arbitrary.
4. Respondents No.1 to 3 had purchased High Income Group (HIG) flats from the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Housing Board (Housing Board) following 2 advertisement and selection. Though they had paid almost the entire sale amount barring 10% of the cost as per last instalment, letters of allotment were issued on 24.09.2002 followed by allotment letter-cum-notice for payment dated 27.05.2003 wherein it was mentioned that any payment beyond the schedule date would attract interest at the rate of 10%. If possession of the flats was not delivered within the stipulated period, Housing Board would be under an obligation to pay Rs.3,000.00 per month to the allottees. Housing Board informed the allottees, including respondents No.1 to 3 herein, vide letter dated 01.03.2005 that the concerned flats would be ready by 11.03.2005. Therefore, the allottees were required to pay balance 10% of the cost besides further amount towards maintenance, car parking etc. Contending that the flats were not fit for occupation, the flat allottees demanded handing over possession of the flats to them or alternatively to pay Rs.3,000.00 per month 3 clarifying that the balance of the instalment amount would be paid once the flats were ready. This led to filing of the writ petition.
5. During the pendency of the writ petition, respondents No.1 to 3 paid the last instalment. However, Housing Board took the view that respondents No.1 to 3 were liable to pay the further sum of Rs.91,000.00 representing the difference of cost from the leftover 10%.
6. After hearing the matter, learned Single Judge took the view that the entire controversy could be given a quietus by directing respondents No.1 to 3 to pay a further sum of Rs.25,000.00 and at the same time directing the appellant to deliver possession of the flats and to execute sale deeds. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of vide the order dated 19.04.2007 in the following terms:
4
"a) The petitioners shall deposit a further sum of Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) instead of 91,000/- (Ninety one thousand) towards cost of the flats allotted to them, as well as the other stipulated amounts towards cost of car parking, maintenance fund, etc, within four weeks from today.
b) On such payment, the A.P. Housing Board shall deliver the possession of the respective flats to the petitioners and execute the sale deeds, within 15 days, from the date of such payment."
7. It is this order which has been impugned by the Housing Board in this appeal.
8. On 09.08.2007 the appeal was admitted and as an interim measure, both the parties were directed to maintain status quo as on 09.08.2007. Subsequently, on 08.10.2007, the interim order dated 09.08.2007 was made absolute subject to the following conditions:
"1) If respondent Nos. 1 to 3 pay the balance amount within a period of three months from today, the competent authority of the appellant shall deliver possession to them and 5 execute the sale deeds in their favour within next two months. The registration expenses shall be borne by respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
2) If the writ appeal is ultimately dismissed, then the appellant shall have to refund the excess amount if any recovered from respondent Nos.1 to 3 with interest @ 9% calculated from the date of deposit."
9. We have been informed at the bar that following the aforesaid order dated 08.10.2007, respondents No.1 to 3 had deposited Rs.91,000.00 with the appellant. Appellant had delivered possession of the respective flats to respondents No.1 to 3. Thereafter, sale deeds were executed which have also been registered.
10. Insofar the second condition in the order dated 08.10.2007 is concerned, refund of the excess amount i.e., amount paid over and above Rs.25,000.00 which is Rs.66,000.00 with interest at the rate of 9%, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 fairly submits that 6 respondents No.1 to 3 would not insist on the interest payment.
11. That being the position and having regard to our order dated 08.10.2007, the writ appeal is dismissed with a direction to the appellant to refund the aforesaid amount of Rs.66,000.00 (Rupees sixty six thousand only) to each of respondents No.1 to 3. The payment shall be made within a period of two months from today.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 14.09.2022 vs