Supreme Court Allows Woman To Retain Plot Allotted Under UP Organised Development Scheme On Compensating Defaulted Instalments

A Bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna was of the view that the offer made by the lady to pay a further sum of Rs 2 lakhs towards compensation for the delay, is a fair one. In view of the same and given that the concerned plot is still vacant, the Bench thought it fit to set aside the cancellation order.

"On payment of a further sum of Rs.2,00,000/­ (Rupees Two Lakhs) to be deposited in favour of the respondent within six weeks from today, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside.Consequently, the order dated 14.06.2006 cancelling the allotment of the plot in question is hereby quashed and set aside."

A 55 year old lady was allotted a residential property in Organised Development Scheme, Phase III, Pilkhuwa District - Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh under the category of Middle-Income group for Rs. 2,70,000. She paid Rs. 94,500 upfront in 2003; the remaining she paid in installments. She defaulted in her 4th to 7th installments. On 14.06.2006, she was served with a notice, which she received on 19.06.2006, informing her that due to non-deposit of installments her allotment had been cancelled. Even before being served with the notice, on 16.06.2006, she borrowed money from her relatives and deposited the entire amount along with interest. Subsequently, she filed a writ petition, inter alia, seeking direction to the authorities to proceed with registration. In view of the interim order of the Allahabad High Court, she paid another Rs. 50,000 on 21.11.2006. But, even then, the High Court dismissed the writ petition solely on the ground that the lady did not pay installments regularly, which is in derogation of the terms and conditions of the scheme.

Senior Advocate, Mr. Kavin Gulati appearing on behalf of the lady submitted that the lady had paid more than the sale consideration which is lying with the respondent. He asserted that there was no deliberate and willful default on her part. Her husband was keeping unwell and being in a financial crisis she could not make the payment on time. It was also stated that the lady was willing to deposit another Rs. 2 lakh as compensation for delayed payment.

Senior Advocates, Mr. V.K. Shukla and Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg appearing for respondents submitted that the authority was well within its rights to cancel the allotment as the payment was not made as per the terms and conditions of the scheme.

The Bench noted that she had paid a sum of money upfront and thereafter diligently paid the first three installment. Only because of her husband's ill health and financial difficulty she delayed in making payment towards the last four installments. However, later she paid the whole amount with interest. The Bench was of the opinion that the payments show her bonafides.

While passing an order to set aside the cancellation order, the concerned authorities were directed to hand over the vacant possession of the plot within four months of the lady paying the compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs.

Counsels for the Appellant: Senior Advocate, Mr. Kavin Gulati; Advocate-on-Record, Mr. Anish Agarwal; Advocates, Mr. Avi Tandon, Ms. Vanshika Gupta, Ms. Meghna Tandon.

Counsels for the Respondent: Senior Advocate, Mr. V.K. Shukla; Advocate-on-Record, Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, Mr. Dinesh Kumar Garg; Advocates, Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Mr. Ashiwan Mishra, Mr. Anurag Tiwari, Mr. Dhananjay Garg, Mr. Abhishek Garg

Case Title: Anjana Saraiya v State of Uttar Pradesh And Ors. Civil Appeal No. 3748 of 2022

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment