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

1987 Supreme(All) 21

K. J. SHETTY, A. N. VERMA
NIRMALA DIXIT – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
H.R.Mishra

K. J. SHETTY, CJ.

( 1 ) THE U. P. Housing Development Board, Lucknow has constructed some houses for the benefit of persons belonging to the category of Middle Income Group (M. I. G.) of Gorakhpur. The persons belonging to MIG must not have annual income beyond Rs. 18,000/ -. The petitioner who belongs to that category has applied for one of the houses. She made the application in 1980, along with registration fee of Rs. 5000/ -. She was, then intimated that the approximate cost of the house would be within the range of Rs. 27,000/- to Rs. 32,000/- which was required to be payable in 144 monthly instalments of Rs. 265/- to Rs. 340/- spread over to 12 years. She was asked to pay interest at the rate of 10% to 11% interest.

( 2 ) IN 1985, the petitioner was allotted a house bearing No. A-275. She was asked to pay the first instalment in a sum of Rs. 2000/- inclusive of other charges. She was served with a notice directing to deposit Rs. 26,448. 25 before July, 31, 1985. In the said notice it has been stated that the approximate cost of the house has been increased from Rs. 32,000/- to Rs. 1,17,465/- and the rate of interest has been enhanced from 10% to 15. 5%. The period for payment








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top