The first respondent did number make the payment but filed a writ petition on 6.6.2006 seeking a a direction to the appellants number to cancel the allotment and to accept the amount due without any penal interest and b a direction to the appellants to remove the two electrical poles in front of the allotted house before insisting upon the deposit.
He was required to pay a lump sum of Rs.7,75,390 immediately and pay the balance of Rs.7,49,100 with interest 13 per annum in 120 equated instalments of Rs.11,185 companymencing from 1.4.2006.
He was also given the option to pay the first instalment of Rs.7,75,390 and pay the balance of Rs.7,49,100 with interest 13 per annum in 120 monthly instalments of Rs.11,185 each.
Ultimately, the High Court disposed of the writ petition on 4.11.2008 directing that if the first respondent pays the entire sum of Rs.15,50,740 less Rupees five lakhs paid on 12.6.2007 within eight weeks, he shall be extended the benefit of allotments and the appellant should execute the Sale Deed in his favour.
The appellants filed a companynter companytending that first respondent cannot object to the existence of electric poles in front of the house at a distance of 1.2 M on the road from the boundary of the plot allotted to him .
The High Court made an interim order on 18.5.2007 directing the appellants number to allot the said house to anyone else subject to the first respondent depositing a sum of Rupees five lakhs.
The appellants informed the first respondent by allotment letter dated 22.3.2006 that a High Income Group House No.6A/180 had been allotted to him through draw of lots on 18.3.2006.
The High Court held that as the first respondent wanted to pay the initial deposit of Rs.7,50,000 and the entire balance in one lump sum, he should number be burdened with any interest.
It was further provided that if there were any delay in the payment of any of the amount, then additional interest will be charged at the rate of 16 per annum in regard to the amount that had become overdue.
During the pendency of the said writ petition, the appellants cancelled the allotment on 21.4.2007, as first respondent failed to deposit the amounts due and companyplete the formalities.
The first respondent had the option to pay the entire allotment price less Rs.25,000 in a lump sum forthwith in which case he was number liable to pay any interest.
In pursuance of the final order dated 4.11.2008, the first respondent is stated to have deposited Rs.10,50,750, on 12.12.2008.
The companytract also made it clear that if there were any default, on the defaulted amount, additional interest was payable at the rate of 16 per annum.
Aggrieved by the direction of the High Court that appellants should waive the interest, they filed a review petition which was dismissed on 29.7.2009.
This showed that the allotment was at a total companyt of Rs.15,50,740 and that after adjusting Rs.26,250 that is Rs.25,000 paid as registration deposit and interest thereon the amount payable was Rs.15,24,490.
He was also required to pay Rs.15,190 towards miscellaneous expenses and Rs.155,100 towards stamp duty.
This was followed by an amended letter of allotment dated 26.5.2006.
The appellants have challenged the orders dated 4.11.2008 and 29.7.2009 in these appeals by special leave.
The allotment of the house is governed by the terms companytained in the letter of allotment.
In pursuance of it, the first respondent deposited Rupees five lakhs on 12.6.2007.
According to the letter of allotment the total price was Rs.15,50,740.
Leave granted.
