MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, SECTOR 17, CHANDIGARH AND ANOTHER Vs. MOHINDER SINGH SINDHU SON OF KRISHAN SINGH SIDHU AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The civil revision is against the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat in an application filed by the respondent seeking for some facilities in response to an order of resumption of the property by the Municipal Corporation. Some facts would be necessary to be stated as to how the petition arrived before the Permanent Lok Adalat.

(2.) One Mohinder Singh Sidhu was the allottee of Booth No.119 for a consideration of Rs. 8,15,000/- to secure a lease for 99 years. This was done in an auction held on 28.10.1999 and the letter of allotment was issued on 23.12.1999. The letter of allotment was on a leasehold basis and it set out several terms and conditions relating to payment of consideration. Of the conditions, condition No.4 provided for payment of 25% of the premium at the site and clause No.5 provided for payment of the 75% within 30 days in lump sum or at the option of the allottee, the amount to be paid in three equated annual installments, the first installment being payable on 28.10.2001, second installment payable on 28.10.2001 and third installment on 28.10.2002 at Rs. 2,81,128/- each. Clause 7-A provided for penalty at 10% and interest @24% for the delayed payment. The authority also had a power of cancellation of lease and forfeit whole or part of the amount already paid if the amount was not paid as per the stipulations. Clause 13 provided that there shall be no transfer of the site or the building without prior permission of the competent authority and that permission would not be granted until the full payment of the premium was made. After the property was said to have been delivered possession on 03.04.2000, letter of handing over possession was issued on the following day on 04.04.2000. Immediately after the delivery, the request had come at the instance of the respondent that he had purchased the property from Mohinder Singh Sidhu on general power of attorney basis, who had claimed that he had made the payment to the allottee as per the agreement. The copy of the GPA and Will said to have been executed were said to have been sent to the competent authority.

(3.) It is a matter of record and admitted by both parties that the first installment had been paid on 12.12.2000, the second installment was paid on 05.07.2002 and the third installment which fell due on 28.10.2002 had still not been paid. There was also a component annual ground rent which was payable for the first 33 years at the rate of Rs. 20,375/-. When the third installment had not been paid and there was also arrears of ground rent payable, the Corporation had been issuing notices to the allottee through the respondent as a power of attorney for the allottee through various notices on 22.07.2002, 11.03.2003, 02.04.2003, 16.05.2003 and 17.07.2003 when at all times, the Corporation had been demanding for payment of balance of money and for getting executed a lease deed in the manner contemplated in the letter of allotment. On 21.10.2003, there had been a notice demanding Rs. 3,78,741/- which was an aggregate of the third installment, the ground rent payable, penalty and transfer charges etc. The amount was directed to be paid before 30.10.2003 and admittedly the amount as demanded had not been paid. When the amount had not been paid as demanded, the impugned order was passed on 30.10.2003 cancelling the allotment in exercise of the powers under Section 12(3) of the Chandigarh Leasehold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973 and forfeiting 10% of the premium, ground rent, interest and other dues payable till the date of cancellation in respect of the lease.