N D M C Vs. AVAT RAM MAMTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant (original respondent in the writ petition) is aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 30th April, 2007. Briefly stated the facts of the present case are as follows:

(2.) A shop was allotted to the respondent (original petitioner in the writ petition) in 1950. In 1992, the respondent requested that the shop be transferred in the name of his son. Two years later, the respondent was asked to confirm that he had given his "No Objection. for transfer of allotment in favour of his son. The respondent gave his confirmation by letter dated 22nd March, 1994. By a letter dated 4th May, 1994, the son of the respondent was informed that he should visit the office of the New Delhi Municipal Corporation (in short "NDMC.) within 7 days for executing fresh licence deed, affidavit to the effect that he did not own any shop in Delhi, to make a fresh security deposit and pay municipal charges from 30th March, 1993 onwards. The respondent.s son made security deposit and signed the licence deed. He also deposited the amount as demanded towards monthly charges and interest. Despite all this, no fresh licence deed was issued in favour of the respondent.s son. Reminders were sent by the respondent but to no avail. In 2001, the respondent received a demand notice for payment of certain amounts. The respondent protested against this demand. However, the demand was not withdrawn and the respondent accordingly wrote on 14th February, 2002 stating that he was no longer interested in getting the allotment transferred exclusively in favour of the son and that the name of the son be added along with his name. Thereafter demands were raised on the respondent towards licence fee/damages which were outstanding. The respondent again wrote on 22nd April, 2003 withdrawing his request for transfer of shop exclusively in the name of his son and requested that his son's name be added with his name without enhancing the licence fee. Nothing happened thereafter. Correspondence was exchanged between the parties and certain challans issued to the respondent by the NDMC towards arrears and damages including interest. By a letter dated 20th July, 2004, the respondent was informed that the NDMC had turned down his request for renewal of licence fee in his name along with the name of the son without enhancement of the fee. The reason for this was stated to be the failure of the respondent and his son to complete formalities for execution of licence deed and making payment pursuant to the earlier demand letters of NDMC. The respondent clarified vide his letter dated 22nd July, 2004, that he had made all payments and had handed over the signed licence deed to the NDMC. The matter was also referred to the Lok Adalat. However, ultimately when the respondent received the impugned demand notice dated 18th January, 2005, the appellant filed the writ petition out of which the present appeal arises.

(3.) Essentially, the case of the NDMC in the writ petition was that the respondent having conveyed his "No Objection. and having handed over possession could not withdraw his request for transfer of the licence to his son. In the reply filed by the NDMC in the writ petition, it nowhere denied that the respondent had made an application for transfer of the allotment in the name of his son, the fact that the son of the respondent made the security deposit, signed the licence deed and paid the municipal charges. It was simply stated that these were "matter of record". It was not even denied that although the son of the respondent had handed over the licence deed to the NDMC for their counter signatures and execution, the NDMC did not do anything about the same. There was no justifiable explanation forthcoming for the unconscionable delay on the part of the NDMC in considering the request of the respondent. Since the respondent did not hear anything from the NDMC even after NDMC framed its policy for transfer of stalls on 18th March, 1999, he wrote a letter on 14th February, 2002 stating that he was not interested in getting the allotment transferred in favour of his son.