Om Prakash Bhalla vs D.D.A.

The present Appeal is directed against the Order dated 22nd May, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant.

The appellant, in a draw of lots held on 8th July, 1997 was allotted a flat in Rohini by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as DDA, for short). Allotment letter was issued on 25th September, 1997 and the appellant was asked to confirm his acceptance and pay the entire amount of Rs. 6,94,031/- within 90 days. Subsequently, a revised demand letter dated 25th September, 1997 with some minor modifications was issued for the same amount.

The appellant deposited Rs. 20,000/- on 27th October, 1997 but questioned the price demanded by the DDA. In 1997 he filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum questioning the demand raised and the price charged by the DDA. District Consumer Forum vide Order dated 3rd March, 2000 dismissed the complaint holding that it cannot go into the question of price/cost of the flat. It may be noted here that a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Sheelawanti v. DDA reported in AIR 1995 Del.213 has held that the issue of cost cannot be gone into by the Courts. Similar view has been taken in the case of Renu Wali v. DDA (LPA No. 884/2003) disposed of on 22nd July, 2005. Even after the Consumer Forum had dismissed the complaint made by the appellant on 21st March, 2000, the appellant did not deposit the balance amount or approach DDA for restoration of his allotment. He however kept on protesting against the demand raised by the DDA and questioning the same by writing letter even after March, 2000. In January, 2002, DDA informed the appellant that it was not possible to accept his request as due to non-compliance of the terms and conditions of the allotment letter, the allotment and registration in his name had been cancelled. He was asked to seek refund of the registration money after surrendering the original fixed deposit receipt. By another letter dated 22nd September, 2004, DDA again confirmed that the request of decrease in the price/cost of the flat cannot be accepted as his allotment already stands cancelled.

It appears that from March 2005 onwards, for the first time the appellant started writing letters seeking restoration of his allotment and stating that he was ready and willing to pay the cost as demanded by the DDA. It goes without saying that the appellant got negative response stating that the appellant''s case has been examined again and again but the position remains the same.

In 2006, the appellant filed a Writ Petition in this Court which as already stated above stands dismissed by the impugned Order. In view of the facts stated above, we do not find any merit in the present Appeal. There has been considerable delay, laches and lapse on the part of the appellant in approaching this Court. The complaint filed by the appellant before the Consumer Forum was dismissed on 21st March, 2000 and he did not make the payment to the DDA and kept on reiterating his earlier pleas challenging the cost from 1997 till 2005, when for the first time he made a request for restoration of the allotment. It may be mentioned here that it was specifically mentioned in the original allotment letter that on failure to deposit the amount demanded, the offer of allotment and registration shall stand cancelled without any further notice.

Learned Counsel for the appellant relies upon the Penalty Relief Scheme, 2007 and states that even in case of default, allotment can be restored to the appellant under the said Scheme. The aforesaid Scheme is applicable to allottees who were allotted flats on hire-purchase basis but have not paid installments regularly after allotment. The said Scheme is not applicable to the appellant as the appellant was not allotted a flat under the hire purchase scheme and has not defaulted in payment of the hire purchase installments. The said Scheme is not applicable to the appellant. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the Appeal and the same is dismissed.