Mohan M. Shantanagoudar JUDGMENT
N.V. Ramana, J.
Civil Appeal No. 10670 of 2018 (arising out of SLP(C) No. 11206 of 2018)
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellants and Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, learned senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent.
3. This appeal is directed against order dated 21.03.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition(C) No. 7928 of 2018 wherein without issuance of notice to the Ghaziabad Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the "GDA") an order was passed in the favour of Machhla Devi (hereinafter referred to as the "allottee"). It is worthwhile to be noted that the impugned order in essence nullifies the detailed order of cancellation of allotment passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court dated 17.05.2016 in Writ Petition (C) No. 28834 of 2004.
Facts in brief
4. The facts giving rise to the present dispute are that GDA launched a scheme known as Shastri Nagar Housing Scheme. The allottee had applied for a High Income Group Duplex "A" Category of house under hire-purchase scheme. Vide letter dated 05.10.1994, the allottee was informed of the allotment of House No. E-376. The estimated cost of the house was mentioned as Rs. 4,33,248/-. The allottee had already paid the registration amount of Rs. 5,000/- and the balance registration amount of Rs. 38,325/- was required to be deposited within a week from the issuance of letter dated 05.10.1994 by which the allotment was made. The remaining amount was to be paid in accordance with a payment Schedule which had to be notified at a later date. The terms and conditions of allotment letter included that in the eventuality of default in payment to GDA within the prescribed time limit, a penal interest of 21% per annum would follow. Further in the eventuality of a further default for a period of three months from the due date along with penal interest, the allotment shall be treated as cancelled. It was also mentioned that possession could be taken pursuant to 50% of payment of the final cost of the house. The allottee deposited the amount of Rs. 38,325/- on 17.10.1994. It is to be noted that the Respondent thereafter deposited instalments without following any Schedule and a lump sum amount from time to time was deposited as under-
5. The total amount payable by the allottee increased as the balance amount of cost of the house included interest and for nonpayment of the same in time also attracted a penal interest at the rate of 21%. The fact on record as alleged is that the Respondent failed to make payment of substantial amount to the GDA. It is alleged that the husband of the Respondent-Chandra Pal Singh was posted in U.P. Police and by influence of his position, she continued in unauthorised possession of said house.
6. In light of the non-payment of any amount by the allottee after 19.05.1998 for a period of almost three and half years, GDA treated the allotment cancelled. However, on the representation made by the allottee subsequently, a direction was made by GDA dated 07.05.2004 regarding depositing of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakhs) within 15 days for the restoration of the cancelled allotment.
7. The Respondent herein challenged the said cancellation of allotment by fi........