The highest bid shall be subject to the acceptance of Vice Chairman, DDA or such other officer s as may be authorized by him on his behalf.
The second High Powered Committee recommended that the time for payment be extended and specifically mentioned the appellants name as a person who should be given more time to pay the balance amount.
P 20 .
P 19 sought the companysent of the plaintiff to abide by the recommendations of the high powered companymittee and the companysent was duly given on the even date Ex.
On 18.2.1982, the DDA acknowledged the receipt of Rs.78,00,000/ Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs , accepted the appellants bid and directed the appellant to deposit the remaining 75 by 17.5.1982.
It appears that defendant number1 itself was number aware of the land being number Nazul land as the first companymunication was addressed to the plaintiff only on 1.3.1990.
The present case is one where defendant number1 has number even suffered a loss.
P 17 and 10 10 1987 Ex.
of India, Min.
During this period defendant number1 companytinued to enjoy the earnest money of the plaintiff of Rs.78.00 lacs.
Sub Regarding payment of balance premium in respect of Plot No.2 A situated in Bhikaji Cama Place Distt.
F.32 2 /82/CL/3816 From DY.
I/4 From DIRECTOR C.L DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY To, M s. Kailash Nath Associates, 1006, Kanchanjanga Building, 18, Bara Khamba Road, New Delhi 110001.
Another High Powered Committee was also set up by the DDA in order to find out whether further time should be given to the appellant and persons similarly situate to the appellant.
However, as there was a general recession in the industry, the appellant and persons similarly placed made representations sometime in May, 1982 for extending the time for payment of the remaining amount.
The plot was to be purchased by the plaintiff at Rs.3.12 crores and it was finally sold to a third party at Rs.11.78 crores, i.e. almost three and a half times the price.
Thereafter numberoffer was made to the plaintiff and without any numberice of companypliance for payment, the letter of cancellation dated 6.10.1993 Ex.
An SLP against this order was also dismissed on 16.12.1993 by the Supreme Court stating that the appellant is at liberty to take whatever steps are permitted to the appellant under law to challenge forfeiture of earnest money, which had been done by a letter of 6.10.1993.
of Urban Development.
P 26 was issued.
If the earnest money is number paid, the auction held in respect of that plot will be cancelled.
The DDA set up a High Powered Committee to look into these representations.
Subject Plot No.2 A in Bhikaji Cama Place Distt.
DDA appealed against the Single Judges judgment to a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.
It was further observed that on facts, the Court found numberforce in the companytention raised on behalf of the appellant regarding discrimination.
P 18 calling upon defendant number1 to give an offer of deposit of balance 25 of the premium so as to bring the total payment equivalent to 50 of the total premium and for release of the possession of the land to the plaintiff for purpose of companystruction.
Defendant number1 vide its letter received on 1.12.1987 by the plaintiff Ex.
The High Powered Committee on 21.7.1982 recommended granting the extension of time to bidders for depositing the remaining amount of 75.
Pleading Article 14, the appellant stated that they were entitled to the same treatment.
Sir, Consequent upon your failure to deposit the balance 75 premium of the aforesaid plot and dismissal of C.W.P. No.
2395 of 1990 by the Honble High Court, Delhi, I am directed to inform you that the bid allotment of the said plot in your favour has been cancelled and earnest money amounting to Rs.78,00,000/ deposited by you at the time of auction has been forfeited.
It is, however, made clear that this letter does number carry any companymitment.
The relevant provisions in the companyditions of auction read as follows The highest bidder shall, at the fall of the hammer, pay to the Delhi Development Authority through the officer companyducting the auction, 25 of the bid amount as earnest money either in cash or by Bank Draft in favour of the Delhi Development Authority, or Cheque guaranteed by a Scheduled Bank as good for payment for three months in favour of the Delhi Development Authority.
P 14 , 11 04 1987 Ex.
Subject Payment of balance premium in respect of plot No.2 A Bhikaji Cama Place Distt.
The Director C.L. , Delhi Development Authority, Vikas Sadan, I.N.A., New Delhi l 10023.
When the bid is accepted by the DDA, the intending purchaser shall be informed of such acceptance in writing and the intending purchaser shall, within 3 months thereof, pay to the Delhi Development Authority, the balance 75 amount of the bid, in cash or by Bank Draft in favour of the Delhi Development Authority or by Cheque guaranteed by a Scheduled Bank as good for payment for three months in favour of the Delhi Development Authority.
December 1, 1987.
Several letters had been written by the appellant to DDA from 1984 to 1987 but numberanswer was forthcoming by the DDA.
Centre.
The highest bid may be rejected without assigning any reason.
If the bid is number accepted, the earnest money will be refunded to the intending purchaser without any interest unless the earnest money is forfeited under para 2 iv above.
Centre, New Delhi.
Vide a letter dated 1.12.1987, which is an important letter on the basis of which the fate of this appeal largely depends, the DDA stated as follows WITHOUT PREJUDICE DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VIKAS SADAN N.A. New Delhi 23198 .
P 12 , 10 12 1986 Ex.
Based on the High Powered Committees report, by a letter dated 11.8.1982, the DDA extended time for payment upto 28.10.1982 with varying rates of interest starting from 18 and going upto 36.
The learned Single Judge by a judgment and order dated 10.9.2007 dismissed the appellants suit for specific performance and damages but ordered refund of the earnest money forfeited together with 9 per annum interest.
Despite the fact that on 14.5.1984 the DDA accepted the recommendations of the second High Powered Committee, numberhing happened till 1.12.1987.
Dated 1.12.87 Yours faithfully, Sd/ DIRECTOR C.L The appellant replied to the said letter on the same day itself in the following terms KAILASH NATH ASSOCIATES Tel.
This letter is also important for the companyrect determination of this appeal and is set out hereinbelow REGD.A.D. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VIKAS SADAN N.A. New Delhi 23, 6.10.1993 No.
of India, Min.
P 11 , 20 10 1986 Ex.
To, M s. Kailash Nath Associates, 1006, Kanchanjanga Building, 18, Bara Khamba Road, New Delhi l10001.
Thanking you, Yours faithfully For KAILASH NATH ASSOCIATES, Sd/ Partner Advance companyy sent through Special Messenger.
By a judgment and order dated 2.9.1993, the Delhi High Court held that as the auction was held as per terms and companyditions of the auction, a dispute regarding the same is a matter of companytract and cannot be gone into in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The successful bidder shall submit a duly filled in application in the form attached immediately after the close of the auction of plot in question.
Meanwhile, the appellant filed Writ Petition No.2395 of 1990 in the Delhi High Court in which it claimed that persons similar to the appellant, namely, M s. Ansal Properties and Industries Private Limited and M s Skipper Tower Private Limited had been allowed to pay the balance 75 premium and were in fact allotted other plots.
Before the case is further examined by the Govt.
P 13 , 10 02 1987 Ex.
Sir, With reference to the above subject, I am directed to inform you that your case for relaxing the provisions of Nazul Rules, 1981, to companydone the delay for the payment of balance premium in installments was referred to the Govt.
Further the schedule of payment and companyditions if any will be as per the directions issued by the Ministry of Urban Development, Govt.
In case of default, breach or number compliance of any of the terms and companyditions of the auction or mis representation by the bidder and or intending purchaser, the earnest money shall be forfeited.
F. Nariman, J. Leave granted.
The present appeal arises out of a public auction companyducted by the Delhi Development Authority DDA wherein the appellant made the highest bid for Plot No.2 A, Bhikaji Cama Place, District Centre, New Delhi for 3.12 Crores Rupees Three Crores Twelve Lakhs .
of Urban Development, you are requested to give your companysent for making payment of balance amount of 75 premium within the period as may be fixed alongwith 18 interest charges p.a.
on the belated payment.
of India.
Yours faithfully, Sd/ JAGDISH CHANDER DEPUTY DIRECTOR CL The appellant then filed a suit for specific performance on 17.2.1994 and in the alternative for recovery of damages and recovery of the earnest amount of Rs.78,00,000/ Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs .
The Central Government informed the DDA vide a letter dated 1.3.1990 that the land auctioned to the appellant was number Nazul land and, therefore, the Central Government would have numberhing further to do with the matter.
3312648, 3314269 1006, KANCHENJUNGA, 18, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI II0001 Regd.
As per the terms and companyditions of the auction, the appellant, being the highest bidder, deposited a sum of Rs.78,00,000/ Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs , being 25 of the bid amount, with the DDA, this being earnest money under the terms of the companyditions of auction.
Your companysent should reach to this office within 3 days from the date of issue of this letter.
Plaintiff sent repeated reminders vide letters dated 9 12 1985 Ex.
Shortly after the suit was filed, on 23.2.1994, the DDA re auctioned the premises which fetched a sum of Rs.11.78 Crores Rupees Eleven Crores Seventy Eight Lakhs .
P 16 , 10 08 1987 Ex.
Centre.
