RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

1. This intra court appeal impugns the judgment dated 18th August, 2004 of the learned Single Judge allowing WP(C) No.2981/1998 preferred by the respondent by quashing the letter dated 6th May, 1992 of the appellant DDA cancelling the bid made by the parents of the respondent for a residential plot of land bearing 7, New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and by directing the appellant DDA to make a fresh demand on the respondent for the bid price together with interest at 12% per annum; upon the respondent so making the payment, the appellant DDA has been further directed to hand over possession of the plot and execute the conveyance deed with respect thereto in favour of the respondent.

2. The appeal was admitted for hearing and vide order dated 9th November, 2004 the operation of the impugned judgment stayed. The appellant DDA was also however restrained from reauctioning the said plot till the disposal of the appeal.

3. The undisputed facts are:

(i) that the auction for the aforesaid plot of land admeasuring 121.50 sq. mtr. was held on 14th January, 1992;

(ii) the parents of the respondent namely Smt. Pushpa Madnani and Sh. Balram Madnani had made the highest bid therefor in the sum of Rs.15,55,000/-;

(iii) in accordance with the auction terms, the parents of the respondent at the fall of the hammer deposited 25% of the bid amount i.e. Rs.3,88,750/-with the appellant DDA on 14th January, 1992 itself.

(iv) that the bid was confirmed on 15th January, 1992 and a demand for the further amount due of Rs.11,66,295/-payable latest by 14th March, 1992 was raised;

(v) no further payment was made by the said date of 14th March, 1992;

(vi) a further sum of Rs.25,000/-was deposited on 17th March, 1992 with the appellant DDA;

(vii) the appellant DDA vide letter dated 6th May, 1992, for the failure of the parents of the respondent to pay the balance amount, cancelled the bid;

(viii) a further amount of Rs. 5,50,000/-was deposited by the parents of the respondent on 31st July, 1992, thereby depositing a total sum of Rs. 9,63,750/-as against the bid amount of Rs. 15,55,000/-;

(ix) a representation dated 6th August, 1998 was made by the parents of the respondent to the appellant DDA for revocation of the cancellation of the bid on the ground that they were unable to pay the entire bid amount owing to financial constraints;

(x) Smt. Pushpa Madnani died on 2nd June, 1993 and Sh. Balram Madnani on 13th June, 1993;

(xi) under cover of letter dated 10th January, 1997 the appellant DDA, after forfeiting the earnest money of Rs.3,88,750/-refunded a sum of Rs. 5,75,000/-;

(xii) ultimately in or about June, 1998, the writ petition from which this appeal arises was filed impugning the letters dated 10.01.1997 and 06.05.1992 aforesaid and seeking a direction to the appellant DDA to accept the balance payment and allot the plot.

4. The appellant DDA contested the writ petition inter alia pleading that the bid stood automatically cancelled on non deposit of the entire amount in terms of the bid confirmation letter dated 15th January, 1992. It was further pleaded that under the terms of auction, the Vice Chairman of the appellant DDA could extend the time for making payment provided such application is made at least 7 days prior to the last date of making the payment; no such application was filed and the amounts of Rs. 25,000/-and 5,50,000/-were deposited by the parents of the respondent on their own and without seeking any extension of time.

5. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition as aforesaid for the reason-

(i) that during the pendency of the writ petition the respondent had also sought redressal through the Permanent Lok Adalat of the DDA, which had passed an order that the Lieutenant Governor as the Chairman of the DDA should reconsider the matter;

(ii) the Permanent Lok Adalat had noted that as per the policy of the DDA as contained in the Office Order dated F.100(56)/86/Imp/CL/Pt. dated 1st May, 1991, restoration