RAVINDER NATH SAHNI Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.CMs 4649 and 4872/90

(2.) Vide order dated 11/10/1990, the petitioner was requiredto deposit a sum of Rs. 8,65,000.00 and the demand of the DDA was to remainstayed. We find that the demand of the DDA is for a sum of Rs. 22,31,453.00.According to the DDA, its demand consists of Rs. 18,91,062 on account of50% un-earned increase and Rs. 3.40.391.00 being the interest @ 18% perannum. According to the DDA, the seller did not file a complete applicationfor permission to sell because No Objection Certificate under the Urban Land(Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 was not attached. This certificate was filedonly on 3/04/1987 and it is thereupon that the application becamecomplete. Because the Income-Tax clearance certificate was filed in 1988, thatis why the DDA is seeking to charge interest of Rs. 3,40,391.00. The 50% unearned increase of Rs. 18,91,062.00has been worked out on the basis of theprice of land as on 3/04/1987, the date the application was completed.

(3.) As the petitioner is already in possession of the house, in ouropinion, the petitioner has to be put to terms because he cannot be allowed tocontinue enjoying the fruits of the transaction without paying, what we, primafade, feel is payable.