LexHARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENF AUTHORITY & ANR. versus ER. HARSH JAIN & ORS .
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENf AUTHORITY & ANR.
A
v.
ER. HARSH JAIN & ORS .
.JULY 19, 1996
[K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.]
Industrial Plot-Price escalation-Permissibility of-Allottee issued
provisional letter of allotment-Stipulation that if allottee seeks exte11sion of
time for completion of pre~requisite fomzalities the rates prevalent at the time
of issue of final allotment letter would be chargecf-Allottee allowed exte11sio11
of time subject to payme11t of extensio11 fee-/11 the mea11while rates of land
increase<f-17iereafter final letter of allotment issued to allottee ca/li11g upo11
him to pay e11ha11ced p1ie<"'-{;hallenge by allotte&-High Court directing to
collect the p1ice as mentioned in the provisional letter of allotment-Appeal
B
c
by Development Amhority-Allottee relying on policy decisio11 of Gove11une11t D
which provided that cost of la11d mentioned in the provisional letter of allot-
ment should remai11 uncha11ged dwing the exte11ded pe1io<f-Held Govem-
ment policy was to operate prospectively-Directio11s for u11cha11ged prices
dwing extended period were applicable to those cases where the extension was
to be completed after the prescribed date and not to those cases which have
already bee11 finalise<f-A/lottee held liable to pay the cost of land as given
in the final letter of allotment.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9893 of
1996.
From the Judgment and Order dated 15.12.95 of the Punjab &
Hary1na High Court in C.W.P. No. 7486 of 1995.
Sunil Gupta and Puneet Dutt Tyagi for the Appeliants.
Anit Mital and K.K. Gupta for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
We have heard learned counsel on both sides.
Leave grant"d.
783
E
F
G
H
784
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.
A
This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division
Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh made on
December 15, 1995 in Writ Petition No. 7486/95. The undisputed facts are
that the first respondent was given a provisional letter of allotment dated
October 29, 1991 (for short, 'P.L.A.') in respect of an industrial plot al
B Roz-ka- Meo, Industrial Estate, Gurgaon admeasuring 4000 sq. yard al
tentative price of Rs. 2,42,000 worked at the rate of Rs. 60.50 per sq. yard.
The respondent had deposited a sum of Rs. 25,000. In the P.L.A. the
respondent was called upon to deposit a further sum of Rs. 35,500 within
the stipulated period towards 25% cost of the land. The balance 75% was
required to be paid in six annual equal instalments with interest at 10%
C per annum subject to compliance of the conditions enumerated thereunder.
D
The conditions as envisaged are :
"(i). To get the registration with the Directorate of Industries
(GM/DIC) of the concerned Distt. or registration with
DGTD/Minislry of Industry, Govt. of India, depending upon the
size of the Industrial undertaking i.e. small, medium or large.
(ii) To get the building plan approved from the competent
authority.
E
(iii) to gel sanction letter from the Financial Institution/ banks for
financing the project.
F
(iv) To supply .list of plant and machinery alongwith quotations.
(v) To supply to Haryana State Electricity Board of release of Jn
electric connection to the proposed site.
1
'
Para 3 provides that the first respondent was to communicate his
acceptance of the provisional allotment \vithin the time specified therein.
In case of non-receipt of acceptance it \Vas treated to have been \Vithdra\vn.
In case the acceptance was received \vithin 30 days from the date of the
G receipt of the provisional allotment, the PLA would be valid for a period
of 90 days in case the project is under self-financing and 180 days in case
he proposes to raise loan from HFC/Banks/All Indian Financial Institu-
tions. In that event, he was required to furnish proof of having completed
required formalities listed in para 2 to the satisfaction of the Authority. He
H wa' also required to deposit security equivalent to 10% of the cost of the
..
-
HUDAv. HARSHJAIN
785
land which would be refundable on implementation of the project. The A
security shall also stand forfeited if the construction was not started within
three months from the date of the production of sanction or of two years
after issue of the allotment letters. Clause 5 is relevant which is as under :
•
11Tn case the pre-requi~itc forn1alities as envisaged in para 3 are
completed witExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.