Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


SUMER CHAND CHORDIA v STATE - CW Case No. 1281 of 1994 [2006] RD-RJ 153 (1 February 2006)




L.Rs. of Late Shri

Sumerchand Chordia v. State of Raj. & Ors.

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1281/1994 under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India. 1st February, 2006

Date of Order :



Mr. D.R.Bhandari, for the petitioners.

Mr. P.C.Sharma, for the respondents.


The instant petition for writ was disposed of by learned Single Judge of this Court on 16.11.1992.

Being aggrieved by the same original petitioner Shri

Sumerchand Chordia preferred an appeal before the

Division Bench of this Court. During pendency of appeal original petitioner Shri Sumerchand Chordia died and, therefore, his legal representatives viz.

Smt. Pushp Kanwar widow of Shri Sumerchand Chordia,

Rajkumar, Praveen and Narendra, all sons of Shri

Sumerchand Chordia and Madhu daughter of Shri

Sumerchand Chordia were taken on record. Hon'ble

Division Bench by its judgment dated 1.7.2003 accepted appeal and remanded writ petition to Single Bench for its hearing afresh. The legal representatives of Shri

Sumerchand Chordia have submitted an amended cause title which is ordered to be taken on record.

Briefly stated, facts of the case are that

Rajasthan Housing Board framed a General Registration

Scheme, 1982 for allotment of houses under various categories known as Higher Income Group Group, Middle

Income Group-B, Middle Income Group-A, Lower Income

Group and Economically Weaker Sections. The petitioner in prescribed form submitted an application for registration under General Registration Scheme, 1982 for allotment of a house in the category of Higher

Income Group. The petitioner for the purpose above also deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- with respondent

Rajasthan Housing Board on 29.12.1982. After registering the petitioner a registration certificate was issued by the Rajasthan Housing Board on 17.2.1986. By a communication dated 3.7.1992 the

Estate Officer, Rajasthan Housing Board, Jodhpur

Circle, Jodhpur informed the petitioner that a house in the category of Higher Income Group is kept reserved for allotment. The petitioner was directed to deposit the consideration for the house allotment in three instalments. In pursuant to the communication dated 3.7.1992 the petitioner deposited a sum of

Rs.35,000/- on 2.8.1982 as first instalment and the sum of Rs.35,000/- and 25,000/- were deposited by the petitioner as second and third instalments on 2.2.1993 and 2.8.1993 respectively. As allowed by the respondents, the petitioner opted to purchase house at cash down ownership instead of rent-cum-ownership. The respondents accordingly by letter dated 30.4.1993 conveyed the petitioner about allotment of house

No.18-E-130, Chopasani Housing Board Scheme, under the out right sale payment option. The petitioner for the purpose was directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,71,291/-.

The statement of demand given by the respondents is as under:-


(A)Cost of House : 1.Cost of Land(Area 237.93 sq.mtrs.).....Rs.107259.00 2.Cost of Construction...................Rs.294687.00 3.Extra charges for DC/SDC house........... --




(B)Other Charges : 1.Ancillary Service Charges..............Rs..17230.00 2.Lease Money (One Year).................Rs...2682.00 3.Interest on outstanding Seed Money/Inst.Rs.64200.00




(C)TOTAL (A+B) Rs.486058.00

(D)Less : 1.Regisration Amount....................Rs..10000.00 2.Interest on Registration Amount.......Rs...8367.00 3.Seed Money Instalment.................Rs..95000.00 4.Interest on Seed Money/Instalment.....Rs...1400.00




(E)TOTAL AMOUNT TO BE PAID (C-D).........Rs.371291.00

By the instant petition for writ challenge is given by the petitioner to escalation in the cost of house as under the General Registration Scheme the cost of house was represented as Rs.1,00,000/- only, therefore, no amount beyond the amount already deposited could be charged. The petitioner also assailed the demand made by respondent Rajasthan

Housing Board on the count that the rate of land charged by the Board is excessive, lease money demanded by the Board is required to be reduced and the respondents unreasonably imposed an interest of


No reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents. However, it is stated at

Bar by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Rajasthan Housing Board that all the questions raised in the present writ petition have already been decided by Division Bench of this Court in DBCivil Special Appeal No.12/93, Rajasthan Housing

Board & Ors. v. Awasan Mandal Parijat Uncha Aywarg

Sangarsh Samiti, by judgment dated 8.8.1995 and the judgment given by Division Bench of this Court also stood affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court by judgment dated 20.3.1997 in Civil Appeal Nos.2114-2115 of 1997,

Awasan Mandal Parijat Uch Ayawarg Sangharsh Samiti through President v. Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors.

I have gone through both the judgments and I am convinced that all the contentions raised in present writ petition have already been considered and decided by Division Bench of this Court and by Hon'ble

Supreme Court. However, while examining the demand made by respondent Rajasthan Housing Board it is found that interest on outstanding seed money in a tune of

Rs.64,200/- has erroneously been added by the Board.

The entire seed money was already deposited by the petitioner and, therefore, no interest against that amount could have been charged. In view of it the demand made by respondent Rajasthan Housing Board in a tune of Rs.3,71,291/- is in excess by sum of

Rs.64,200/-. This amount is required to be reduced from the demand made by respondent Rajasthan Housing

Board while making allotment in favour of the petitioner. It is also pertinent to note that this

Court by an order dated 27.5.1994 restrained respondent Rajasthan Housing Board from cancelling allotment made in favour of the petitioner, as such the allotment in favour of the petitioner still survives.

In view of factual position stated above respondent Rajasthan Housing Board is required to allot the house bearing No.18-E-130 in its Chopasani

Housing Board Scheme, Jodhpur to the petitioner by reducing the demand of Rs.3,71,291/- by Rs.64,200/-.

The respondent Rajasthan Housing Board shall issue a revised demand note within a period of 45 days from today and in the event the petitioner after receiving the revised demand deposits the amount demanded within a period of next 30 days, the possession of the house shall be given to the petitioner.

With above observations the writ petition is disposed of.

( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. kkm/ps.


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.