Respondent No.1 herein being heir of the original sub lessee entered into an agreement for sale with Respondent Nos.
Note In respect of pending applications, where companyveyance deeds are yet to be executed registered, refund in respect of companyversion fee paid, if any, on account of these instructions should be allowed.
Kaushalya Rani Bhusari on similar grounds.
In terms of proviso appended to sub clause b of clause 6 of the dead of sub lease, the lessor was entitled to recover a portion of the unearned increase in the value i.e. the difference between the premium paid and the market value of the residential plot at the time of sale.
iii In respect of premium free leases, the companyversion fee will be companyputable on the basis of the prevailing land rates as numberified by the Government, from time to time, on a graded basis as applicable to other leases.
N.R. Pillai.
The respondents thereafter filed writ petitions before the Delhi High Court questioning the said demand letter dated 22.2.1995.
ii In respect of properties with areas above 500 sq.
A 5/3, Vasant Vihar, N. Delhi ABDUL RASOOL VIRJI Plot No.
Joginder Singh Monga son Sh.
Jagjit Singh Monga son Sh.
They in terms of the provisions of The Rules were required to execute deeds of sub lease in favour of the lessee as also the President of India.
During the pendency of the aforementioned proceedings, however, a purported resolution was passed by the D.D.A. to the effect that unearned increase should be worked out on the basis of sale companysideration shown in the agreement of sale or income tax clearance certificate, as the case may be, if it is higher than the floor level rate of D.D.A. HIGH COURT JUDGMENT The High Court in its impugned judgment referring to the circular letters issued by the Lt.
mtrs, the 50 unearned increase companyes to Rs.48,54,764.00.
meter, which was the rate numberified by the Government of India by letter dated 1.6.1987 and the said rates were companysidered for 100 FAR and since total FAR is 824 sq.
meters, the companyversion fee will be charged on the basis of slab rates as per Annexure and land rates as applicable with effect from 1.4.1987.
The appellant herein despite the same proceeded on the basis that having regard to the fact that the purchaser had agreed to pay the companysideration of Rs.5,00,00,000/ and further agreed to bear the companyt of difference in unearned increase, the market value of the land would be Rs.7,50,00,000/ and on that basis demanded a sum of Rs.3,62,44,420/ as a companydition of grant of permission by a demand letter dated 22.2.1995.
This issues with the approval of Finance Divisions U.O. No.1066 F dated 21.6.99.
In the case of J.S. Monga, Abdul Rasool Virji as well as Rajeev Gupta, the High Court passed interim orders directing them to deposit the entire amount part amount demanded by the D.D.A. Rajiv Gupta, however, did number pay the said amount and as such numbersale deed was executed.
Rajeev Gupta was permitted to execute the aforementioned deed by paying only the companyversion charges, i.e. without payment of even 50 of the unearned increase.
Brij Rani Burman Sh.
Prabha Sehgal daughters Smt.
In the light of this, it is number open to the DDA to put forth the case that the market value, within the meaning of the clause 6 of the perpetual sub lease deed companyld be what is stated in the agreement for sale.
In case any amount had been paid on the basis of the impugned demand, the DDA shall be entitled to appropriate only that portion of the amount calculated in accordance with fixation of market rate of land as issued by the Delhi Administration on the 24th of June, 1992 and accepted by the DDA on the 11th of August, 1992 and shall pay back the balance with interest 18 p.a.
Pursuant to or in furtherance of the provisions of The Act and The Rules, the appellant herein granted lease in favour of a Cooperative Society known as the Government Servants Cooperative House Building Society Limited, Shri Mangal Singh Monga, Shri N.R. Pillai and Shri Satish Chander Malhotra were the members of the said Cooperative Society.
After his death mutated in favour of Sh.
The proposed purchaser, however, besides the said amount and other expenses also agreed to bear 50 of the amount towards unearned increase.
The Division Bench in its impugned judgment numbericed various orders passed by the authorities of the appellant herein, inter alia, in of the writ petition being C.W. No.350 of 1995 wherein it was numbered It is further stated that 50 of the unearned increase was also calculated on the basis of the market value rate of Rs.5,400/ per sq.
The respondents herein thereafter filed an application for raising additional pleas, inter alia, on the ground that having regard to the interim order passed in the writ petition by the High Court of Delhi, the deed of sale having been executed by them pursuant to or in furtherance thereof, they were entitled to be treated similarly as Rajeev Gupta.
As such, leased properties, situated on land, for which the land use prescribed in the Master Plan Zonal Development Plan in force is residential, will be companyered under the scheme, irrespective of size.
Name of Sub Lessee Sh.
It is number in dispute that one Rajeev Gupta also filed a writ petition before the High Court acting on the basis of a power of attorney executed by Smt.
The Income Tax Department also granted a No Objection Certificate on or about 12.5.1994 showing the companysideration of Rs.5,00,00,000/ in respect of the plot in question.
In another case relating to Plot No.
It is number disputed that Civil Appeal No.
By reason of clause X a , of the said deed the President delegated his power to the Chief Commissioner of Delhi who is number the Lt.
BACKGROUND FACTS The admitted facts are the lands in question being Nazul lands are governed by the provisions of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 The Act and the Delhi Development Authority Disposal of Developed Nazul Land Rules, 1981 The Rules framed thereunder.
meters.
Plots allotted under the scheme of Large Scale Acquisition Development and Disposal of land in Delhi is enclosed These rates would be applicable to the plots measuring upto 500 sq.
Date of Execution of Sub Lease Deed 13.12.1968 1.1.1965 27.4.1971 2.
1783 of 2000 titled D.D.A. vs. Rajeev Gupta was disposed of on 30.4.2003 in terms of a signed order as the case was said to be companyered by the policy of companyversion from leasehold to freehold and the proposal of the D.D.A. to companypromise was numbered.
Transferred on the basis of Sale Permission, in favour of Smt.
COMPUTATION OF CONVERSION FEE In respect of properties with land area upto 500 sq.
Abdul Rasool Virji Sh.
yards in Vasant Vihar on payment of Rs.17560/ towards premium and Rs.26656/ towards the companyt of development.
meter, the amount of 50 of the unearned increase was worked out to Rs.15,04,300/ .
4.13 crores Dt.
1.12.1994 7.
Date amount of 50 UEI paid Dt.
16.5.1995 Rs.3,62,44,420/ Dt.
Date of execution of Sale Deed Registration of the same 6.6.1995 17.1.1997 Not executed 9.
The Government of India, however, without enforcing any increase in the sale price of the land extended the validity of the land rates in force till 31.3.1992 for a further period from 1.4.1994 to 31.3.1996 by a circular letter dated 11.11.1994.
Relying on clause 3 of the said scheme which is to the following effect It is further clarified that these orders will have prospective effect and the cases already decided will number be re opened.
from the date of payment by the petitioner companycerned.
Relying on or on the basis of the practice adopted by the D.D.A. and having regard to the orders dated 24.6.1992 issued by the Delhi Administration and that of the Government of India as also the resolution dated 28.11.1995, it was held It does number require any argument to say that the DDA was well aware of this clause and had issued the Order dated 11.8.92 on the basis of the Order issued by the Delhi Administration on the 24th of June, 1992.
An objection to the said application had been filed by the appellant, inter alia, on the ground that subject matter of the writ petition leading to filing of these appeals has numbernexus with the aforementioned scheme dated 28.6.1999.
Harbans Monga wife Smt.
Name of Purchaser Sh.
Kaushalya Rani Bhusari w o Sh.
Respondent No.1 herein thereafter filed an application before the companypetent authority of the Appellant on or about 23.5.1994 for sale of the leasehold property indicating the companyt of companystruction and price of the plot as Rs.5,00,00,000/ .
A 1, Maharani Bagh, N.D. RAJIV GUPTA Plot No.4, Palam Marg, Vasant Vihar, N.D. 1.
On 13.12.1968, a statutory sub lease was executed in favour of Shri Mangal Singh Monga in respect of residential plot of 1568 sq.
Admittedly, the said circular letter was companymunicated to the companycerned officers.
To be taken up for disposal towards the end of the short matters on April 10, 1997.
Satish Chander Malhotra.
The said Mangal Singh Monga died on 13.11.1983.
Mangal Singh Monga after his death mutation allowed in the joint names of his legal heirs Smt.
Compliance within six weeks.
To companye up for hearing on 24th February, 1997.
C. Lahoti, J. N. Kapur, J. 24.02.1997 Present Mr. A.N. Haksar, Senior Advocate with Mr. R.K. Virmani for the Petitioner.
Such amount was to be paid within a period of sixty days.
F 16 7 /82/LB/20369 75 dated 24.6.92 companyveying the market rates of land in different areas of Delhi for companyputation of unearned increase recoverable in case of transfer sale of Resdl.
Mutated on 28.5.93 in the names of sons of sub lessee Sh.
Date of Agreement of Sale 19.2.1994 16.1.1994 24.10.1993 5.
12.6.1996 Rs.
Letter No.
Two weeks further time by way of last opportunity is allowed to the DDA to companyply with these directions.
Rajiv Gupta 4.
Determination of the lessor in respect of the market value therefor was to be final and binding.
Governor of Delhi.
Delhi Admn.
R.S. Pillai.
Rattan Chand Burman 2.
Within a period of four weeks the parties will also place on record short synopsis or numberes.
ii The scheme will also extend to premium free leases i.e. leases where premium has number been charged by agencies administering the leases.
Date on which companyversion from lease hold to freehold applied 24.12.1999 24.12.1999 17.12.1999 From the aforementioned chart it would appear that number only the application of Rajeev Gupta was companytemporaneous, all other relevant facts are almost identical.
Ella Bajaj Sh.
In respect of Sale Transfer of plots measuring more than 500 sq.
The relevant portion of the said scheme reads as under COVERAGE OF THE SCHEME The existing scheme of freehold companyversion is extended to all residential leasehold built up properties irrespective of size.
8 and 9 wherein the amount of companysideration was shown as Rs.5,00,00,000/ .
R.A. Pillai Sh.
22.5.1996 Not paid 8.
Whereas J.S. Monga deposited the entire amount as demanded, Abdul Rasool Virji deposited a sum of Rs.1,49,72,225/ , as per the directions of the High Court.
metre.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and following directions are issued The DDA shall issue fresh demand to the petitioners in all these three writ petitions on the basis of Order dated 24.6.1992.
12.6.1996 Rs.1,49,72,225 paid as per the Order of the High Court of Delhi, Dt.
4,13,00,000/ , whereas J.S. Monga and Abdul Rasool Virji were to pay sums of Rs.3,62,44,420 and Rs.2,23,34,725/ respectively, pursuant to interim order passed by the High Court.
Date on which Sale Permission granted Transfer allowed 25.1.1996 Transfer allowed 30.7.1996 Not granted 10.
Purported to be in exercise of such delgated power, the Delhi Administration fixed the market price of the nazul lands situated in different localities for the purpose of recovery of increase in the companyt of the land upon sale for the periods from 1.4.1988 to 31.3.1990, 1.4.1990 to 31.3.1991 and 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1992 in terms whereof the price of the land in Vasant Vihar area was determined at Rs.10500/ per sq.
S 23, Panchshila CHBS Ltd., it was numbered by the authorities of the Appellant On the basis of those rates i.e. Rs.15,120/ per sq.
The factual matrix of the matter is being companysidered from the case involved in Civil Appeal No.1781 of 2000.
Sampuran Singh, on dated 2.12.1988 3.
SUBSEQUENT EVENTS When the matter was taken up for hearing, before different Division Benches, the respondents herein sought to bring to this Courts numberice certain subsequent event, namely, adoption of a purported policy by reason of a circular letter dated 28.6.1999 purported to have been given a prospective effect in terms whereof the leasehold was sought to be companyverted into freehold.
meters, the companyversion fee will be charged on the basis of already approved graded scale circulated vide Ministrys letter dated 14.2.1992 and land rates as applicable with effect from 1.4.1987, as indicated in the Annexure.
Particulars S. MONGA Plot No.
Upjeet Singh Monga son Sh.
Indira Batra Smt.
B. SINHA, J These appeals involving companymon questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this companymon judgment.
Mohinder Singh Monga son Sh.
