MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

( 1 ) THE Appellant was the highest bidder in an auction conducted by the delhi Development Authority (DDA) in 1972 in respect of plots No. 47 and 48, Nehru Place, New Delhi. The bid given by the Appellant was thereafter confirmed and possession of the two plots was handed over to it some time in 1973.

( 2 ) ONE of the auction conditions related to payment of ground rent. This condition reads as follows:-"ground RENT: (1) In addition the premium, the intending purchaser of the lease-hold rights in the plot shall have to pay a yearly ground rent. The ground rent will be at the rate of Re. 1/- per plot per unit for the first three years allowed for construction purpose and thereafter, will be at the annual rate of 2-1/2% of the amount of premium. (2) The ground rent will be enhanced after every 30 years provided that the increase in the rent at each such time shall not exceed 100% of that immediately before the enhancement is due. "

( 3 ) THE Appellant constructed a multistorey building on the plots and parted with possession in respect of various portions thereof to several sub-lessees/tenants/occupants. It appears that there was an agreement between the Appellant and the sub-lessees/occupants that they would pay a proportionate amount of ground rent to the Appellant, who would in turn pay it to the DDA. The DDA was not a party to this arrangement.

( 4 ) SOME time in 1984, it appeared to the DDA that it had not received the ground rent in terms of the auction conditions. In view of this, the assistant Collector (Grade-I) of the DDA (Respondent No. 3) passed an order on 17th May, 1984 attaching the rent due to the Appellant and also restrained the Appellant from receiving any further rent from the sub-lessees/occupants. The Appellant was naturally aware of this order, yet it took no steps to challenge it. In fact, one of the contentions urged before us is that this order still subsists.

( 5 ) ON or about 23rd September, 1992, the Assistant Collector passed an order against the Appellant to the effect that a sum of Rs. 6,81,139. 81 was due from it towards ground rent and interest on belated payment in respect of the aforesaid plots of land. The Appellant was directed to make the payment on or before 8th October, 1992.

( 6 ) FEELING aggrieved by the demand, the Appellant preferred an appeal before the Collector (Nazul) of the DDA (Respondent No. 2 ). In the appeal, the Appellant raised an issue about the correctness of the order dated 17th may, 1984 whereby the Appellant was restrained from recovering any amounts from the sub-lessees/occupants of the multistorey building and contended that in view of the restraint, it was not in a position to recover any money from them or to pay the ground rent to the DDA. The Collector (Nazul) found merit in this contention and by an order dated 1st March, 1993 remanded the matter to the Assistant Collector for passing suitable orders so that the recovery of ground rent is not hampered. The Appellant was also directed to deposit all amounts recovered by it within 15 days and to also give complete details of the arrears of payment due from the sub-lessees/occupants of the multistorey building. The Collector (Nazul) gave liberty to the Assistant Collector to raise a fresh demand within six weeks.

( 7 ) IN compliance of the order dated 1st March 1993, the Appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 1,24,517. 85 in the first week of April, 1993 towards ground rent. The Assistant Collector also reconsidered the issues raised by the Appellant and issued a fresh demand of Rs. 6,16,788. 21 by an order dated 21st March, 1994. Feeling aggrieved by the fresh demand, the Appellant filed an appeal before the Collector (Nazul) but by an order dated 5th June, 1995, the appeal was dismissed with liberty to the Assistant Collector to issue a revised demand. Pursuant thereto, the Assistant Collector raised a revised demand on 20th June, 1995 for a sum of Rs. 6,48,063. 61.

( 8 ) FEELING aggrieved by the ord

Click Here to Read the rest of this document