Renuka Khanna vs State of Haryana

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.—This writ petition is filed to quash the show cause notices issued to the petitioner vide Annexures P2, P4 and P6.

The 2nd respondent namely Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the `HUDA'') framed a scheme for allotment of Industrial plots and also issued an advertisement calling for applications. In response to the said advertisement, the petitioner applied for allotment of one of the industrial plots alongwith a deposit of Rs. 5477/ as earnest money as required in the said advertisement. Thereafter, the petitioner was informed vide letter dated 5.7.1985 that she has been allotted a plot bearing No. 799 in Sector 21C, (PartII) at Faridabad on freehold basis. According to the terms of the said letter, the petitioner was asked to pay a sum of Rs. 8215.50 and the balance amount of 41,077.50 were to be paid in six annual instalments. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 8216/. Thereafter the HUDA issued another notice for payment of revised tentative price of the plot @ 247.11 per sq. mtr. and the revised tentative price of the plot was fixed as Rs. 57,082.50. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 577.50 on the basis of the letter dated 31.3.1986. Under the terms of the letter dated 5.7.1985, the HUDA was required to deliver the possession of the plot within 90 days from the issuance of the said letter, but the possession was not delivered to the petitioner. Without complying with the terms and conditions of the allotment letter, HUDA issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 16.11.1987 demanding a sum of Rs. 17,120/ from the petitioner and also issued a show cause notice stating that why a penalty of Rs. 1712/ on the said amount be not imposed on her vide Annexure P2. The petitioner gave a reply on 28.12.1987. Thereafter the HUDA issued another show cause notice on 19.8.1988 vide Annexure P4 and she was asked to appear before the authorities on 23.9.1988. Accordingly, the husband of the petitioner went to the office of HUDA on 23.9.1988, but the office was closed on account of holiday. The HUDA again issued another notice on 7.11.1988 vide Annexure P6 directing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 31,251/.

Questioning the action of the respondents in demanding interest from the petitioner for nonpayment of the instalments and for not delivering the possession of the plot to the petitioner, she approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

There is no dispute that the petitioner was allotted a plot of 1500 sq. yards bearing No. 799 in Sector 21C, at Faridabad. There is also no dispute that the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 5477/ alongwith the application for allotment of a plot and also further sum of Rs. 8215.50 on issuing the letter of allotment and a further sum of Rs. 577.50 on the receipt of letter dated 31.3.1986. The only controversy appears to be in regard to the payment of interest on the balance of instalments due. Admittedly, the petitioner has not paid instalments after 31.3.1986 till the date of filing of the writ petition. After filing of the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 15,625/. Clauses 6 and 7 of the allotment letter read as follows :

"6. The balance amount i.e. Rs. 41,077/ of the above tentative price of the plot/building can be paid in lumpsum without interest within 60 days from the date of issue of the allotment letter or in six annual instalments. The first instalment will fall due after the expiry of one year of the date of issue of this letter. Each instalment would be recoverable together with interest on the balance price at 10 per cent interest on the remaining. The amount of interest shall however accrue from the date of offer of possession.

The possession of the site will be offered to you on completion of the development work in the area. In the case of building or undevelopment land, the possession shall however, be delivered within 90 days from the date of this letter."

Thus, it is clear that the instalments that fall due shall be recoverable with interest on the balance price at the rate of 10 per cent on the remaining, but the amount of interest shall however, accrue from the date of offer of possession of the plot. Therefore, it is clear that the interest will be calculated only from the date of offer of possession of the plot. Though under clause 7 of the letter of allotment, the HUDA was required to give the possession of the plot after completion of development within 90 days from the date of the letter of allotment, admittedly, no possession has been delivered to the petitioner. Therefore, under clause 6, the HUDA is entitled to charge interest from the date of offer of possession. The offer to deliver the possession was made to the petitioner on 2.11.1989 vide Memo No. A/21 C/89/0799 dated 2.11.1989. Therefore, the HUDA is entitled to claim interest from 2.11.1989 on the amount of instalments due.

In this view of the matter, the HUDA is directed to calculate the interest on the amount of the instalments due as on 2.11.1989 at the rate of 12 per cent P.A. from the date when the instalments fell due upto 19.8.1991 and give credit of Rs. 15,625/ which has, admittedly, been paid by the petitioner and calculate the interest on the remaining balance from 19.8.1991 at the rate of 12 per cent P.A. till 31.3.1996 and intimate the same to the petitioner and the petitioner is directed to pay the said amount so calculated and demanded by HUDA on or before 30.4.1996. On payment of the said amount, the petitioner shall be given possession of the plot within one week from the date of payment made by the petitioner.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in part with the above directions. No order as to costs.