Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 7494 of 2004
PETITIONER:
HARSH VARDHAN BANSAL
RESPONDENT:
CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD AND ANR.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24/05/2006
BENCH:
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN & LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
JUDGMENT:
JUDGMENT
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. :
Heard Ms. Prashanthi Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms.
Rachana Joshi Issar, learned counsel for the respondent Board.
This appeal is directed against the order passed by the High Court
dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein on the ground of
concealment of facts. The appellant applied for allotment of an H.I.G.
(Ind.) flat. Under the Scheme, a person would be eligible for allotment of
a dwelling unit in case he/she or his wife/her husband or any of his/her
dependent relations including unmarried children does not own free hold or
lease-hold or on hire-purchase basis a residential plot/house in the Union
Territory of Chandigrah or in either of the Urban Estates of Mohali and
Panchkula. Similarly, in case he/she has acquired a house/residential site
anywhere in India through Govt./semi government/Municipal
Committee/Corporation/Improvement Trust at concessional rates, i.e. at
reserved/fixed price, in his/her name or in the names of dependent members
of his/her family, he/she will not be eligible for allotment of a dwelling
unit.
A complaint was received by the respondent-Housing Board that the appellant
was owning a flat namely K-26, Sector-25, NOIDA under the self-finance
housing scheme of Airforce Naval Housing Board and the same was confirmed
by the Airforce Naval Housing Board, New Delhi vide its letter dated
10.09.1997. It was also further intimated to the respondent Board that land
for the construction of group housing was allotted to it by the NOIDA at a
fixed rate as was charged from other group housing societies. At the time
of hearing, our attention was drawn to para 11 at page 93 of the paper-
book, which read as follows:
"Whether you, or your wife/husband or any of your dependent relations
including unmarried children is a member of any Cooperative House Building
Society which has been allotted land or is registered for allotment of land
at reserve/fixed price for construction of Residential house for its
members, under any scheme framed/notified by the Government, Urban
Development Authority/Housing Board/Improvement Trust/Municipal
Committee/Corporations/Notified Area Committee?"
Learned counsel for the respondent Board submitted that the appellant has
furnished incorrect information in regard to the allotment made in his
favour by the NOIDA authorities and has suppressed such fact from the
purview of the Housing Board. Therefore, the respondent Board, by the
impugned Show Cause Notice, cancelled the allotment made in favour of the
appellant which was challenged before the High Court. The High Court
dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. Our attention was also
drawn to clause XI of Regulation 6 of the Scheme which reads as follows:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
"XI-. Mis-representation or suppression of facts :- If it is found at any
time that the applicant has furnished any incorrect or false information or
suppressed any material facts in the application form for registration or
later on, which makes him/her ineligible, the registration as well as
allotment, if made, shall be cancelled and the total deposit made till date
shall be liable to be forfeited. The applicant shall further be liable to
penal consequences under the law."
Learned counsel for the respondent-Board submitted that though the Clause
XI of the Chandigrah Housing Board (Allotment, Management and Sale of
Tenements) Regulations, 1979 enables the Board to cancel the registration
of the dwelling unit or the flat and to forfeit the deposit received with
the application and all the payments made to the Board thereafter, the
respondent pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 12.7.2004 refunded
Rs. 8,06,441. As already noticed, a sum of Rs. 10 lacs and odd was
deposited and the Housing Board has now refunded a sum of Rs. 8 lacs and
odd even though they are entitled to forfeit the entire deposit made. Now
that a major portion of the amount has already been refunded to the
appellant, we do not propose to go into the merits of the rival claims or
the correctness of the order passed by the High Court or the cancellation
order passed by the Housing Board. We also make it clear that any
observation made in the Show Cause Notice or in the order passed by the
High Court will not affect the career of the appellant herein since, as
argued and accepted by us, the appellant has furnished all the details in
the application form for registration on a bonafide belief and impression.
The civil appeal is disposed of according. No costs.