Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Alfa Offset Printing Press vs Delhi State Industrial ...
2009 Latest Caselaw 4116 Del

Citation : 2009 Latest Caselaw 4116 Del
Judgement Date : 12 October, 2009

Delhi High Court
Alfa Offset Printing Press vs Delhi State Industrial ... on 12 October, 2009
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
67
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+       W.P.(C) 1114/2008

        ALFA OFFSET PRINTING PRESS      .... Petitioner
                        Through    Mr. Bahar U Barqi, Advocate.

                     versus

        DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
        CORPORATION LTD. & ANR.           .... Respondent
                          Through   Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocate with Mr.
                                    Gaur, Legal (Manager).
        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
              ORDER

% 12.10.2009

In 1996, the petitioner, Alfa Offset Printing Press deposited Rs.

1,20,000/- for allotment of an industrial plot at Bawana with the

respondent No.1 Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.

(DSIDC for short).

2. The petitioner was allotted plot No.9, Pocket-D, Sector-4 at Bawana

Industrial Complex, measuring 250 sq.mtrs, by the respondent DSIDC.

3. By letter dated 23rd October, 2000, DSIDC called upon the petitioner

to pay 50% of the revised estimated cost of the plot @ Rs. 4,200/- per sq.

mtr., amounting to Rs. 5,25,000/-. The last date of payment was 31st March,

2001.

4. It is an admitted case of the parties that till 31st March, 2001, the

W.P.(C)1114/2008 Page 1 petitioner had paid Rs. 4,68,300/- as per the following details, earnest

money of Rs. 1,20,000/- on 1st April, 1996, Rs. 94,500/- on 17th July, 1998

and Rs. 2,53,800/- on 23rd January, 2001.

5. In addition the petitioner was entitled to interest @ 7% per annum at

least on the earnest money of Rs.1,20,000/-, which was deposited on 1st

April, 1996.

6. DSIDC issued the circular dated 18th July, 2002 for extension of due

date for payment of the revised estimated cost. The relevant portion of the

said circular reads as under:-

"In continuation to our earlier letter and press advertisement issued from time to time requesting you to deposit the balance 50% cost of the plot No.9, Pocket D, measuring 250sq mts. Allotted to you at Bawana against your application No.1212, it is to inform you that the last date for payment of the balance 50% cost of plot has been extended up to 14.8.2002 with interest in case of all allottees of Bawana who have deposited 50% cost of the plot by 31.3.2001 or those who had not paid 50% cost of the in full and their payment was short by 10% due to difference of interest on EMC etc. and made good the short fall till 1.4.2002 alongwith 18% interest w.e.f. 1.4.2001" (emphasis supplied).

7. The aforesaid circular stipulates that the applicants, who had not

made payment of 50% cost in full and their payment was short by 10% due

W.P.(C)1114/2008 Page 2 to difference of interest on earnest money etc. they can make good the

short fall till 1st April, 2002 along with 18% interest with effect from 1st

April, 2001. Counsel for the respondent DSIDC admits that the circular

dated 18th July, 2002, was issued granting concession and extension of time

to applicants, who had not paid 50% cost of the plot in full and their

payment was short by 10%.

7. It is admitted that the petitioner is entitled to interest @ 7% p.a. on

earnest money of Rs. 1,20,000/-. Interest accrued on the earnest money

cannot be ignored for computing the short fall as is apparent from the

language of the circular. If interest @ 7% p.a. on Rs.1,20,000/- is taken into

consideration, the short fall in the present case is Rs.46,200/-. Thus, the

shortfall is less than 10%.

8. It is admitted that the petitioner had deposited Rs. 70,000/- on 1st

April, 2002. If this amount is taken into consideration, the petitioner had

deposited Rs.5,38,000/- by 1st April, 2002 and in addition to interest which

had accrued on Rs.1,20,000/-. As stated above 50% of the price of the plot

is Rs. 5,25,000/-. Thus, the petitioner has satisfied and has complied with

the conditions and requirement of the circular.

8. Counsel for the respondent DSIDC has submitted that the deposit of

Rs. 70,000/- made on 1st April, 2002 was without any requisition or letter

W.P.(C)1114/2008 Page 3 from DSIDC. This to my mind is immaterial. On the other hand, the DSIDC

accepted the said payment and did not dispute the same. DSIDC did not

refund the amount deposited or write to the petitioner that the payment

was received under protest and without prejudice to their rights. Principle

of the estoppel applies. The petitioner thereafter had further made

payments of Rs. 2,10,000/- on 5th June, 2002, Rs. 2,10,000/- on 18th

December, 2002 and Rs. 1,20,380/- on 23rd April, 2004. The petitioner has

made the entire balance payment of the plot.

9. In view of the aforesaid findings, the impugned order dated 28th

January, 2008 is set aside and mandamus is issued to the respondents to

allot the plot in question to the petitioner. The petitioner will be entitled to

cost, which are assessed at Rs.10,000/-. The cost will be paid within four

weeks from the date copy of this order is received.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

OCTOBER 12, 2009
NA




      W.P.(C)1114/2008                                                    Page 4
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter