BAHADURGARH FLAT HOLDERS ASSOCIATION versus THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 276 · Decided: 06-12-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
SECTOR-6, BAHADURGARH FLAT HOLDERS 
ASSOCIATION (REGO.) AND ORS. 
v. 
THE STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. 
DECEMBER 6, 1995 
[K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA AND S.B. MAJMUDAR, JJ.] 
Punjab Urban Estates (Development & Regulation) Act, 1964-Sec. 3 
declared urban estat,,_punjab Urban Estates (Sales of Sites) Rules, 
C 1965-Pennit sale of the sites-Provisions of Haryana Urban Development 
Authority Act, 1977 and rule 5(7) of the Haryana Urban Development 
Authority (Disposal of Land and Building) Regulation, 1978-Held, not ap-
plicable. 
An offer was made for free hold sale of plots with all modern 
D amenities like underground sewerage, storm water, drainage, roads, 
electricity, supply of potable water etc. Appellants applied for allotment as 
per terms and conditions mentioned in the memo. As per condition, No. S 
the first instalment became due, i.e. after expiry of one year from the date 
of issue of the allotment order. On the instalment not having been paid, 
E Respondent No. 2 sent notice to the member of appellllnt Association to 
pay the instalment induding 7% interest on the total price of the plol The 
members acted as required by the notices but without actually taking 
possession of the plots. The members of the appellant made various 
representations to Respondent No. 2 for early development and for deliver-
ing the possession of the plots. It was also represented that the members 
F of the appellant Association were being charged interest without such 
delivery of possession of the plots, which according to the members was 
not permissible. 
Despite the representations, as the plots were not developed appel-
G lant No. 2 approached the High Court. The High Court held that interest 
was chargeable and as regards possession, since development was still 
taking place and as soon as the development was completed, possession of 
the plot would be offered. Aggrieved appellant preferred the present ap-
peal. 
H 
On behalf of the appellant, it was contended that what was offered 
276 
BAHADURGARH FLATHOLDERSASSN. (REGO.) v. STATE (HANSARIA, J.]277 
for allotment was developed plots and not undeveloped ones. As the plots A 
are yet to be developed fully, the respondents could not have charged 
interest because possession of development plots is yet to be given. 
Disposing of the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The allotment being under the Punjab Rules, the B 
provisions of the Haryana Regulations cannot be called in aid and it 
because of this that terms and conditions mentioned in the allotment order 
of the othc~ persons can be of any. assistance to the appellants. [280-C] 
2. The power of extension given to the Estate Officer is really meant C 
to be exercised when the transfree, after receipt of possession of the land 
is not in a position to complete the building; therefore interest cannot be 
demanded till offer of possession is made. The Interest in the present and 
similar cases had become due from 17.10.1980. It would be open to the 
members of the Association to claim refund if they had paid interest, as D 
claimed in the notices by the Respondent No. 2. [280-H, 282-E-F) 
3. When parties enter contract, they are to abide by the terms and 
conditions of the same, unless the same is inequitable. [282-C] 
4. The respondents are directed to develop the sector fully and not E 
almost fully within a period of six months failing which the respondent 
would not only be liable for contempt but also the allottees would be 
exonerated from the liability to pay any interest whatsoever. [283-B) 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2347 of 
the 1981. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.10.80. of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. No. 2415 of 1980. 
F 
Y.P. Rao, S. Srinivasan and M.S. Indu Malhotra for the Appellants. G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
HANSARIA, J. Bahadurgarh was declared as an urban estate by the 
State Goverrunent of Haryana in exercise of powers conferred by section 
3 of the Punjab Urban Estates (Development & Regulation) Act, 1964 H 
278 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A (hereinafter 'the Punjab Act'). The declaration of any area to be 'urban 
estate', permits the State Government, inter alia, to sell the sites in accord-
ance with the Punjab Urban Estates (Sales of Sites) Rules, 1965 (for short 
'the Punjab Rules'). An offer was accordingly made for free hole sale of 
about 2200 plots first come first serve basis in Sector No. 6 of the estate. 
B Appl

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.