RADHIKA KAPUR Vs. D L F UNIVERSAL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is preferred against the order dated 4.9.2000 in u. T. P. E. No. 206 of 1998 passed by the mrtp Commission by which the interim relief sought for by the appellants was rejected with certain observations.

(2.) In the application/complaint filed under section 36a of the Monopolies and Restrictive trade Practices Act (for short 'act') , the main relief sought for was to restrain the respondent from cancelling the allotment of the apartments in D. L. F. Beverly park, Gurgaon for non payment of the extra amount demanded from the appellants by the letter dated 2.6.1997 etc. The immediate provocation for filing the complaint seems to be the letter issued by the respondent company on 18.9.1998 calling upon the appellants to pay the escalated charges by 10th October, 1998 failing which, the respondent threatened to cancel the allotment without further notice. One of the other reliefs sought for was to direct the respondent to handover possession of the apartment forthwith. The last prayer was to inquire into the unfair trade practices adopted by the respondent and to direct the respondent to desist from such action in future.

(3.) Initially the appellants filed a miscellaneous application under Section 120 of the act seeking stay of demand of extra charges and to restrain the respondent from cancelling the allotment of the apartments for non-payment of the extra amount demanded. Thisrapplication was rejected on 23.4.1999. The Commission observed that the propriety or otherwise of demanding extra charges will have to be decided in the main enquiry and that there was no prima facie ground to grant interim relief, especially, having regard to the fact that the applicants were protected against cancellation of allotment by virtue of the undertaking given by the respondent in this behalf.