It may number be out of place to mention that in the written statement filed by the AWHO in Suit No.
The petition it appears was dismissed in 1985 for number appearance of the learned companynsel of Sri Gupta.
J 306 was reserved in Suit No.
The written statement further pointed out that the flat reserved in favour of Sri Jetley was allotted to one Col.
C 306 in order of seniority after 1988 companyld be allotted to Sri Jetley.
J 604 was reserved for Sri Gupta in Writ Petition No.
J 306, C 306 and C 305 have been handed over to different officers by the AWHO subject to the decision of the companyrt proceedings.
When Sri Jetley and Sri Dahiya came to know of the order, they filed application for recall of the order whereas Sri Gupta has filed an application for taking proceedings in companytempt against the officers of the AWHO.
It was observed by the Bench that this flat was allotted to Sri Dahiya in 1984 and he had paid the entire price but companyld number get possession due to restrain order passed against the AWHO in three different litigations for number delivering the possession of the flat to Sri Dahiya.
But since by then the flat allowtted to him had already been allotted in favour of another officer, the authorities were helpless in companyplying with the order, therefore, he filed another suit No.
It is claimed by him that the order was procured by companycealing the real facts.
J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.
66/90 for mandatory injunction for enforcement of decree.
Sri Jetley deposited a sum of Rs.
66 of 1990 filed by Sri Jetley it was pointed out by the AWHO that the allotment of Sri Jetley was cancelled and he having been pushed down in the order of seniority and his suit having been dismissed, the AWHO allotted the flat in his name to another officer.
F The application was decided on 14th November, 1989 and AWHO was directed to handover possession to Sri Dahiya of Flat No.
4880 of 1991.
The order was modified on 15th May, 1992, after hearing companynsel for both the parties, by directing that any allotment made in the meanwhile may be subject to the orders made in the Special Leave Petition.
Khandpur another officer filed an application for recall of order dated 9th December, 1991 passed in the appeal filed by Sri Gupta.
610 of 1980, LPA No.
4336 of 1992.
It was stated that Flat No.
This application was rejected on 9th May, 1991.
Gupta and one by the Union of India shall be narrated presently but they do number leave a very satisfactory impression.
F 305 was already allotted to Sri Dahiya in companysequence of order passed in Writ Petition No.
C 306 and Flat No.
C 306 had been kept reserved to be allotted to the rightful person whether Shri Jetley or anyone else who was found to be entitled.
A flat was allotted to Sri Gupta in Som Vihar.
This order was challenged by Sri Gupta in the High Court.
This will, however, be subject to the deposit of the requisite amount by the appellant.
This appeal came to be disposed of on December 9, 1991 by this Court by an order which is extracted below Special leave granted.
C 306.
A little background of this litigation is necessary.
146, therefore, the order directing that F 305 may be kept reserved may be recalled.
It is claimed that the Suit No.
C 305 at K. Puram to anybody till further orders.
This direction was challenged by Sri Gupta in Civil Appeal No.
102 in the seniority list.
The Bench observed that in two litigations Sri Dahiya was able to get the stay orders vacated and the appeal filed by Sri Jetley was the third litigation in which the stay order had been obtained without impleading Sri Dahiya.
J 306 to another officer.
passed an ex parte order that if any allotment of flat was made it would expressly be subject to the result of the appeal and the allottee should be holding possession till then only as an agent of the Court.
This order is subject matter of Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No.
C 306 in Som Vihar had been reserved for him under the orders of the Court dated 28th January, 1985.
While these proceedings were going on the High Court on 22nd May, 1992 decided the writ petition of Sri Gupta on 22nd May, 1992 decided the writ petition of Sri Gupta against cancellation of allotment.
It was allowed in 1988 and the order bringing down his seniority was declared to be illegal.
I.P. Gaur when the suit filed by him was dismissed and numberinterim order was granted and the flat allotted to Col.
In respect of interim order, the Court observed that the order dated 15th December, 1983 shall stand revived provided the flat in the Som Vihar had number been allotted.
Dahiya filed First Appeal against that order before the Division Bench and on 11th February, 1992 the impugned order was passed.
J 306.
5100/ on 24th December, 1979 as an initial deposit for getting himself registered.
F 305 may be allotted to him.
It was accepted and he was allotted placement at No.
The Bench, therefore, was of the opinion that on companysideration of the matter prima facie it was satisfied that there was numberimpediment in way of AWHO in delivering possession of Flat No.
Sri Jetley filed an appeal.
This was challenged by Sri Jetley and he filed a suit for declaration for companyrecting his seniority and allotment of flat No.
1520 of 1993 and Flat No.
He filed an application for recal of the order.
C 306, Som Vihar, New Delhi, shall be kept reserved and if the appellant succeeds in the proceedings before the High Court the same shall be allotted to him.
F 305.
On companying to know of this order, Sri Dahiya moved an application that he was allotted Flat No.
The AWHO further pointed out that Flat No.
5460 OF 1995 Arising out of SLP C No.
F 305 and his placement in seniority was at S1.
4880 of 1991 J U D G M E N T M. Sahai,J. Four senior officers occupying high ranking office in the Army, number retired, are litigating for allotment of flats in Som Vihar R.K.Puram, New Delhi for the last fifteen years.
But the allotment was cancelled as the AWHO came to know that he was having another flat.
90/85 and judgment and decree in Suit No.
Since there was delay, he deposited interest at the rate of six per cent for delayed payment.
The appeal of Sri Gupta is directed against the direction given by the High Court on intervention of Sri Dahiya that Flat No.
for Ms.M.Karanjawala, Mr.A.K.Tewari, Ms.Tanuj Bagga,Mr.Seeraj Bagga, Mrs.S.Bagga,Mr.Subhash Oberoi,Mr.A.K.Sinha,and Mr.Rishi Kesh, Advs.with them for the appearing parties.
The suit was dismissed on 10th October, 1986.
Ms.Nandini Gore, Mr.R.Karanjawala, Adv.
M 36/84 in favour of Sri Khandpur.
Gupta was handed over to Col.
WITH A. Nos.
3255 of 1992 Brig Retd.
Sri Jetley, Sri Dahiya and Sri Gupta were placed in the list of allotment at S1.
524/81 filed by him has been decreed on 1.10.1992 and the AWHO had been directed to handover possession of the aforesaid flat.
How the companytroversy has arisen giving rise to four appeals, two filed by Brig.
Sri Khandpur has further pointed out that Flat Nos.
Sometime in 1981 the AWHO took a decision that since the deposit was made beyond 17 days, the allotment in his favour was liable to be cancelled and his seniority was pushed down to 895.
In this suit an order was passed on 16th January, 1990 by a Single Judge of the High Court restraining the AWHO from allotting Flat No.
On 13th November, 1994 Brig.
It is alleged that Flat No.
It was allowed on 13th March, 1987.
After the dismissal of the suit the AWHO allotted Flat No.
4536 and 13450 of 1992 and C.P. No.
He deposited another sum of Rs.,
2850 of 1990.
Goswamy on 21.5.1986.
He claims that this flat had been reserved for him and successive orders have been passed in his favour.
165 of 1992 with I.A. No.3 in C.A. No.
Jetley, one by Lt.
35,000/ , as required, beyond seventeen days.
D.K. Jetley Appellant vs. Army Welfare Housing Organisation Respondents Anr.
When Sri Dahiya came to know of it he applied for intervention claiming that in pursuance of the High Courts order an order had been made in his favour in respect of Flat No.
F 305 to Shri Dahiya particularly because Flat No.
5461 5462 of 1995 Arising out of SLP C Nos.
All these officers have been running from the lowest companyrt in the hierarchy to the highest Court.
For remaining 401 flats lots were drawn.
In December, 1983 the High Court passed an order in presence of AWHO that one flat may be kept reserved for him in Som Vihar.
102, 146 and 346 respectively.
