Yashpal Singh vs D.D.A.
2013 Latest Caselaw 1770 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                       Date of Decision: 18.04.2013

+     W.P.(C) No.3961/2012

      YASHPAL SINGH                            ..... Petitioner
                   Through: Mr.Deepak Khosla, Advocate

                           versus

      D.D.A.                                     ..... Respondents
                           Through: Mr.Sangram Patnaik with Mr.
                           Umesh Yadav, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

                           JUDGMENT

V.K.JAIN, J. (ORAL)

1. The agricultural land of the petitioner having been acquired for the

planned development of Delhi, an alternative plot measuring 90 sq. mtr. was

allotted to him, as per the policy of the respondent to allot alternative plot to

persons whose land is acquired by them. Vide Demand-cum-Allotment

letter dated 18th March, 2008, the petitioner was asked to pay the premium

of the land at the pre-determined rate of Rs.6108.00 per sq. mtr. in the

following manner:-

W.P.(C) No.3961/2012 page 1 of 5 "1. That 10% premium of the plot termed as earnest money/confirmation amount for Rs.54972.00 shall be deposited within 30 days from the date of issue of this demand letter.

2. The 25% of the total premium amounting to Rs.137430.00 shall be deposited within 60 days from the date of issue of this Demand-cum-Allotment letter.

3. The 50% of the premium amounting to Rs.274860.00 shall be deposited within 60 days from the last date fixed for payment of 25% of the plot for which no further Demand Letter will be issued.

4. The balance 15% of the total premium amounting to Rs.82458.00 shall be deposited within 30 days from the last date fixed for payment of 50% premium of the plot for which no further Demand Letter will be issued."

2. It is an admitted case of the parties that the petitioner did not make

payment in terms of the above referred schedule contained in the Demand-

cum-Allotment letter dated 18th March, 2008. Vide order dated March

13,2008, the respondents were asked to consider the request of the petitioner

for extension of time on payment of appropriate interest for the period

during which there was delay in making payment in terms of the Allotment

letter. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent/DDA states that

W.P.(C) No.3961/2012 page 2 of 5 has taken instructions and the instructions given to him is that since there

was delay beyond 180 days, the same cannot be condoned. Learned counsel

for the respondent has relied upon a Resolution passed by DDA, vide Item

No.52/2004, which reads as under:-

"B) No restoration shall be allowed beyond 180 days in case of first two chances. However, in case of third draw (last chance)/restoration may be allowed subject to payment being made within a maximum period of 360 days after which the allotment would stand automatically cancelled. Regularization up to 270 days shall be done at the level of Principal Commissioner and upto 360 days the case shall be regularized by the Vice Chairman.

C) In extremely deserving cases where delay was beyond the control of allottee/legal heirs such as death, encroachment on the land allotted, orders of competent court etc. the case can be put up with full justification to Hon'ble L.G. for regularization. However, this stipulation should be used with all precautions and should be used very sparingly.

D) Within the above scheme, if the deficient amount involved is only upto 10% of demanded amount or Rs.25000/-

whichever is less than the power to restore the delay would vest

W.P.(C) No.3961/2012 page 3 of 5 with Commissioner (LD) irrespective of the period of delay.

E) In case of differential premium which is being raised after finalization of PDR by Ministry of Urban Development, powers to regularize delay would rest with Commissioner(LD) irrespective of, period of delay and amount subject to payment of penal interest @ 15% per annum. Generally this amount does not exceed Rs.50,000/-."

3. Since the case of the petitioner is not covered under the above-

referred policy decision of DDA, it is not possible for the respondent to

condone the delay in making payment by the petitioner.

4. Clause 8(i) of the Letter of Allotment dated 18th March, 2008 reads as under:-

"That in case allottee fail to deposit the part premium and earnest money as demanded above and or the balance premium as and when demanded as per para-7 above, the earnest money deposited by the allottee shall stand forfeited."

It is, thus, evident that on account of delayed payment on the part of

the petitioner, the allotment made to him stood cancelled and DDA is

entitled to forfeit the earnest money i.e. 10% of the land premium, from the

money deposited by the petitioner with it.

W.P.(C) No.3961/2012 page 4 of 5

5. The respondent DDA is, therefore, directed to refund the money

deposited by the petitioner with it after deducting the amount of earnest

money. Since DDA has utilized the money deposited by the petitioner

instead of refunding the same as soon as it was deposited by the petitioner,

it shall also pay interest on the aforesaid amount to the petitioner @ 6% p.a.

from the date of deposit the date of refund. The refund in terms of this order

shall be made within eight weeks.

The writ petition stands disposed of.

A copy of this order be given dasti.

                                                          V.K. JAIN, J


APRIL 18, 2013
ks

W.P.(C) No.3961/2012                                      page 5 of 5