DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SHREYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant appeal, DDA seeks to challenge the Order dtd. 13/7/2021 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Impugned Order') passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 5992/2021, titled as Shreya v. Delhi Development Authority. The learned Single Judge by way of the Order impugned herein has allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent herein seeking a writ of mandamus directing the DDA to accept 25% of the reserve price which had to be deposited by the Respondent herein in pursuance to the e-auction held on 7/8/2020 for plot No.210, Pocket-1, Phase-III, Sector-25, Rohini, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the property in question').

(2.) Shorn of details, the facts leading to the instant appeal are as under: This is a digitally signed Judgement.

(3.) Mr. Ashim Vachher, learned Standing Counsel appearing for DDA, contends that an e-mail was sent by the DDA to the Respondent herein along with the LoI and it is possible that the e-mail got bounced. He states that the system generates the e-mail and an SMS was sent to the Respondent as an additional mode of communication. He states that the LoI was also uploaded on the e-auction portal. He states that in any event, the Respondent herein knew that an SMS has been sent and money has to be deposited. He also states that the LoI was there in the web portal. He submits that the Respondent has not deposited the money and there is nothing which prevented the Respondent herein from depositing the money within the prescribed time limit. He states that the principle contention of the Respondent has always been that the DDA has stated in the bid document that 20% of the bid premium was to be submitted by the Respondent within seven days from the issuance of LOI. He This is a digitally signed Judgement.