SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(P&H) 1370

IN THE HIGH COURT PUNJAB & HARYANA
[DIVISION BENCH]
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina
LPA No.933 of 2009 (O&M)
Haryana Urban Development Authority & Anr.
v.
Vinod Mittal & Ors.
{Decided on 16/10/2012}

For the Appellants-HUDA:Mr. Anupam Gupta, Senior Advocate, with M/s Sidharth Batra, Angel Sharma & Karan Sandhu, Advocates.
For the Respondents-Allottees:Mr. Arun Palli, Senior Advocate, with M/s Tushar Sharma, Fateh Saini, Arastu Chopra & Tarun Vir Singh Lehal, Advocates.

Allotment of Plot--Delayed Payment--Levy of Interest @ 18% justified--Even though there was no such clause in the allotment letter.

Headnote:(A) Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, S.16--Allotment of Plot--Delayed Payment--Levy of Interest @ 18% justified--Held;

       (i) That lack of amenities cannot be made a ground for not making the payment of installments in terms of the letter of allotment. The interest on installments of the deferred payment of the sale consideration alone is chargeable from the date of offer of possession. Since the possession was offered and construction raised, the allottees are liable to pay interest on the amount of installments from the date of offer of possession itself.

       (ii) In the event of non-payment of installments along with interest thereon, the Authority is justified in charging interest at the rate of 18% p.a. Such interest is to ensure the timely payment of the installments and is aimed at mitigating the extreme hardship which may result from resort to the last measure of resumption of land or building. However, the rate of interest at the rate of 18% cannot be compounded, as there is no provision either in the Act or in the Regulations or in the Circular for compounding of such interest.

       (iii) The Authority is competent to charge interest, as it has the authority to levy penalty under Sections 16, 17 & 55 of the Act apart from the power of resumption of land or building. The charging of interest is a policy adopted by the Authority short of resorting to the extreme remedy of resumption. Therefore, such policy is in fact designed for the benefit of the allottees. (Para 61)

       (B) Interest Act, 1978--Allotment of Plot--Delayed Payment--Levy of Interest @ 18% justified--Authorities under the Act will not be able to take recourse to the provisions of the Interest Act--Such levy of interest by the Authorities is traceable to the provisions of Sections 16, 17, 54 & 55 of the Act--Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, S.16. (Para 58)

       (C) Interest Act, 1978--Allotment of Plot--Delayed Payment--Levy of Interest @ 18% justified--Even though there was no such clause in the allotment letter--Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, S.16.

       Though in the letter of allotment, there was no clause for charging interest on delayed payment of the balance sale consideration, but the consequences of non-payment i.e. resumption of site, forfeiture of the amount paid and imposition of penalty are still available to the Authority--Therefore, it cannot be said as an established legal principle that the Authority is not competent to charge interest so as to ensure timely payment of the installments where payment of price/premium/sale consideration is deferred. (Para 54)

       

JUDGMENT

Mr. Hemant Gupta, J.: - This order shall dispose of aforementioned appeal along with bunch of other appeals and writ petitions, as mentioned in the foot note of the order, as all these cases raise common question of law and facts.

2. Challenge in LPA No.933 of 2009 is to an order passed by the learned Single Judge, therefore, the facts are taken from the said case alone. In the said appeal, the appellant is the Haryana Urban Development Authority (for short ‘the Authority’), who has allotted plots to the respondents in the appeals or to the writ petitioners, who are for facility of reference called as ‘the allottees’ hereinafter.

3. The dispute in this bunch of cases is to the levy of interest, compound interest and the penalty for not making the payment of installments in terms of the conditions of letter of allotment. Before we come to the terms & conditions of the letter of allotment the relevant Sections of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (for short ‘the Act’) necessary to decide the issue involved, are reproduced as under:

“15. Disposal of land – (1) Subject to any directions given by the State Government under this Act and the provisions of sub-section (5), the Authority may dispose of –

(a) xxx xxx

(3) Subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, the Authority may sell, lease, or otherwise transfer whether by auction, allotment or otherwise, any land or building belonging to it on such terms and conditions as it may, by regulations, provide.

(4) The consideration money for any transfer under sub-section (1) shall be paid to the Authority in such manner as may be provided by regulations.

(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, for the time being in force, any land or building or both, as the case may be, shall continue to belong to the authority until the entire consideration money together with interest and other amount, if any, due to the Authority, on account of the sale of such land or building or both is paid.

(6) Until the conditions provided in the regulations are fulfilled, the transferee shall not transfer his rights in the land or building except with the previous permission of the Authority, which may be granted to such terms and conditions, as the authority may deem fit.

16. Imposition of penalty and mode of recovery of arrears – (1) Where any person makes default in the payment of –

(i) any rent due in respect of any lease of any land or building or both, as the case may be, under Section 15; or

(ii) any fee or contribution payable under this Act in respect of any land or building or both, the Estate Officer may direct that in addition to the amount of arrears, a sum not exceeding that amount shall be recovered from the person by way of penalty.

Provided that no such direction shall be made unless the person affected thereby has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter.

(2) Where any person makes default in the payment of any amount, being the arrears or penalty or both directed to be paid under sub-section (1), such amount may be recovered from him, in the same manner as arrears of land revenue.

17. Resumption and forfeiture for breach of conditions of transfer – (1) Where any transferee makes default in the payment of any consideration money, or any installment, on account of the sale of any land or building, or both, under section 15, the Estate Officer may, by notice in writing, call upon the transferee to show cause within a period of thirty days, why a penalty which shall *be equal to ten percent of the amount due from the transferee, be not imposed upon him.

(2) After considering the cause, if any, shown by the transferee and after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, the Estate Officer may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, make an order imposing the penalty and direct that the amount of money due along with the penalty shall be paid by the transferee within such period as may be specified i


















































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top