ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Vs. GOVT OF NCT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.(C) NO. 10607-08/2004 The facts of the case are that consequent on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for relocation of polluting industries the Petitioners became entitled to the allotment of an industrial plot. By letter dated 3.4.1998 the Respondents had informed the Petitioners that- "Based on preliminary scrutiny, your unit has been found to be provisionally eligible for allotment of an alternative industrial plot measuring 250 Sq. Mtrs.." A sum equivalent to :30 per cent of the estimated cost of the plot was demanded. By letter dated 10.10.2000 the Respondents informed the Petitioners that a plot ad measuring 250 sq. mtr. in Sector-I, Pocket-H, Plot No.6 at Bawana Industrial Complex; Plot No.9, Sector-I had been allotted to the Petitioners. The Schedule of Payments had been indicated in the Agreement between the parties. As per this Schedule of Payments 90 per cent of the cost of the plots had been deposited by the Petitioners by December, 2002. By Annexure P-7 dated 2.1.2004 the Respondents decision to down-size the plot to 200 sq. mtrs. had been conveyed to the Petitioners. Since 90 per cent of the cost of the plot had been paid in respect of 250 sq. mtrs. Plot, this necessarily meant that excess payment had been received by the DSIDC. It accordingly refunded the excess amount. On 20.7.2003 this amount was credited to the Loan Account of the Petitioner with the Delhi Financial Corporation (DFC). The down-sizing of the plots has not been challenged in this Petition.

(2.) The demand made is that the Petitioner should be paid interest on the amounts paid in advance of the date for payment of instalments as indicated in the Agreement. It has also been contended that after the down sizing of the plot the Respondent had indicated that no interest would be chargeable from allottees upto 1.11.2004. Therefore, so the argument goes, since the entire payment had already been received from the Petitioner in December, 2002, the Petitioners should be paid interest up-to 1.11.2004.

(3.) I find no merit in the Petitions. Reliance on the decisions of Single Benches of this Court in J.K.Synthetics Ltd. Vs. Ansal Housing and Constructions Ltd., 2002 IV AD (DELHI) 713 = 101 (2002) DLT 503 and Surinder Kumar Sood Vs. DDA, 2002 VIII AD (DELHI) 415 = 101(2002) DLT 110 are of no assistance to the Petitioners. In the present case all that can be said is that the Petitioners have deposited the entire amount due against plot ad measuring 200 sq. mtrs. before it had fallen due as per the schedule for payment of instalments. This will not entitle the Petitioners to claim interest. It would mean that if any person pays a sum of money prior to the last date of payment as per the contract, such a person would be entitled to daim interest which must be rejected as soon as it is raised. The claim vis-a-vis 1.11.2004 is even more far fetched.