Supreme Court Orders Greater Ashoka and Land Development Co to Pay Rs.50 lakhs to Settle 60-Year-Old Land Dispute
The bench noted the significant increase in land price appreciation
Supreme Court Orders Greater Ashoka and Land Development Co to Pay Rs.50 lakhs to Settle 60-Year-Old Land Dispute
The bench noted the significant increase in land price appreciation
The Supreme Court has ordered Greater Ashoka and Land Development Company to pay Rs.50 lakhs to settle a 60-year land dispute with an allottee of a plot.
The Division Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed that merely refunding the earnest money paid decades ago would be unreasonable, considering the significant land price appreciation over time.
The suit was filed by the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents seeking specific performance of a contract.
While the trial Court decreed the suit, the lower appellate Court reversed the judgment. It directed the execution of the sale deed and granted the relief of refunding the earnest money along with interest.
However, the Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the judgment and decree of the trial Court and set aside the judgment of the appellate Court.
The counsel for the appellant contended that the approved layout plan for Ashoka Enclave Extension, Part-III, Faridabad, was in 1961. The respondent provisionally booked a plot but failed to meet the subsequent payment schedules.
The zone was, thus, designated a controlled area under the Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963. This necessitated the appellant to obtain relevant permissions.
Subsequently, permissions under the 1963 Act and later the Haryana Restriction of Development and Regulation of Colonies Act, 1971, were obtained.
The respondent sought a refund of the earnest money and interest accrued on it. However, facing complications, the appellant offered a new plot at a revised rate, which the respondent refused to accept.
After issuing a legal notice, the respondent remained silent for a long period. Though, he later filed a civil suit seeking specific performance or a refund with interest.
The appellant argued agreement frustration due to developments. He insisted it was the respondent's failure to accept the offered plot within the stipulated time, which led to the forfeiture of the earnest money. He expressed willingness to refund the earnest money with interest, even at a higher rate.
The Top Court observed that the allotment of the plot was made in 1963. Despite certain developments and permissions required by the appellant for the development of the land as a colony, the details and specifics were not adequately furnished to the respondent. The plot was offered to the respondent at a higher rate than the initial allotment rate.
The bench noted that the respondent actively sought information and requested the appellant to supply the layout plan. However, he did not receive any response.
The judges stated that the civil suit for specific performance was filed within the period of limitation. They added that merely refunding the earnest money, paid after 60 years, was unreasonable since the price of the land in the area had increased manifold.
Thus, while disposing of the appeals, the Apex Court modified the impugned judgment and decree of the High Court. It ruled that instead of getting the sale deed of the plot registered at the initial allotment rate, the appellant must pay Rs.50,00,000 to the respondent as a full and final settlement of the claim.