Complainant/respondent booked an LIG flat in 1979 by paying Rs.1,500/- to the appellant Delhi Development Authority. On 5.9.1989, respondent applied for conversion of old LIG registration into SFS Category-II, which was accepted by the appellant. In 1990, appellant offered flats under SFS, in which the respondent applied to get the flat. Thereafter in 1992-93, respondent again applied for a flat under the scheme advertised by the appellant but could not get the same. In the year 1994, he again applied for a flat offered under SFS category and was allotted a flat in Dwarka instead of a flat of his choice which he did not accept. On cancellation of the said allotment, respondent sought refund of money which was not returned and his registration continued. Again in 1996, respondent applied for a flat in a scheme offered by the appellant under SFS but he was not allotted a flat under SFS though new applicants were allotted flats. By this time, he was ready to accept the allotment in any area. He again contacted the appellant but his request was not acceded to by the appellant. Being aggrieved, respondent filed the complaint before the State Commission. State Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the appellant to allot the flat at the prevalent rate in any other scheme, if available. Otherwise, the appellant was directed to refund Rs.15,000/- to the respondent with interest @ 12% p.a. with effect from 9.12.1997 till the date of the order. Rs.5,000/- were awarded by way of costs. Respondent filed execution application before the State Commission. During the currency of the execution proceedings, appellant offered Flat No.35-D, Category II, Pocket II, Sector 7, Dwarka at the cost of Rs.28,49,000/- if paid till 23.5.2010 and at cost of Rs.29,55,839/- if paid till 21.8.2010. On failure, the allotment was to be cancelled. State Commission disposed of the execution application in the following terms : “This Commission cannot fix the price. The decree holder will pay the amount according to the demand letter sent by DDA to him, which the decree holder now before us undertakes to deposit in the office of the J.D. within one month from today for obtaining the allotment/possession of the flat. The objection of the J.D. that there is automatic termination of allotment of the flat as the D.H. failed to deposit the amount pursuant to demand letter issued by the J.D. to him, will not hold good, since an objection is pending before us against the said demand. So far as demand of payment of interest on this amount raised by the counsel for J.D. is concerned, we are disinclined to accept it. There is no agreement or term for payment of interest. Beside dispute is still pending. No question of payment does therefore arise.” Being aggrieved, the judgement debtor/appellant has filed the present appeal. Appellant, in pursuance to the decree passed against it, made an offer to allot Flat No.35-D, Category II, Pocket II, Sector 7, Dwarka at the cost of Rs.28,49,000/- if paid till 23.5.2010 and at cost of Rs.29,55,839/- if paid till 21.8.2010. Since this offer was made during the pendency of the execution application, State Commission has disposed of the complaint in terms of the offer made. Respondent has agreed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of passing of the order. Question of payment of interest would not arise as the offer made by the appellant during the pendency of the execution application has been accepted by the respondent. No ground for interference is made out. Dismissed. |
