High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Suresh Chandra v. A.D.A., Allahabad & Another - WRIT - C No. 32800 of 2001  RD-AH 966 (4 April 2005)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32800 of 2001
Suresh Chandra ..... Petitioner
Allahabad Development Authority,
Allahabad and another. .... Respondents.
: Present :
( Hon'ble Justice Amitava Lala and Hon'ble Justice Sanjay Misra )
: Appearance :
For the Petitioner .... Sri Y.K.Sinha
For the Respondents .... S.C. &
Amitava Lala,J. According to the writ petitioner that the price of built up house is Rs.3,61,630/- as on particular date. But by a letter dated 2.11.2000 the authority said the price would be Rs.3,95,874/- and by due to mistake it is wrongly recorded Rs.3,61,630/-. The writ petition was moved in the year 2001 and by virtue of order dated 3.10.2001 the operation of the impugned order dated 04.09.2001, under which the claim has been made, remain stayed. The contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that since the mistake has been committed on the part of the authority he is not supposed to pay any excess amount. He is entitled to execution of document in his favour on the basis of payment already made.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that from the very beginning it was known that the estimated cost is Rs.3,95,874/-. The price which has been quoted in the letter is the price of the year 1992 which was subsequently enhanced in 1994. The correspondences were made in respect of enhanced payment.
We are of the view that there is gulf of difference between estimated cost and final cost. It appears to us that cost is crystallized in the letter dated 2.11.2000.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents further contended that the interest, as claimed is not beyond the scope of terms and conditions and only imposed on unpaid amount or delayed payments. Therefore, such claim of interest is independent of the claim of the said sum of Rs.34,264/- i.e., the excess amount. We have carefully considered such application and we find that the respondents authority is entitled for said sum of Rs.34,264/- and interest upon the delayed payment as claimed for. But so far as the interest is on the aforesaid crystallized figure on a letter dated 2.11.2000 is concerned since the interim order obtained on 3.10.2001 the respondents will be entitled to interest on such amount also between such period on the said sum.
If the payment as indicated above is made to the respondents within a period of one month from this date in that case the execution of the sale deed will be made within a further fortnight immediately thereafter. The period is mandatorily fixed by this court for the purpose.
Thus the writ petition stands disposed of. No order is passed as to costs.
( Justice Amitava Lala )
(Justice Sanjay Misra )
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.