9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (12) TMI 393X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as rightly held by the Commission. Moreover, it is pertinent to note that no offer was made before the Commission nor in the SLP filed in this Court for payment of extra charges, ‘without prejudice’. Thus no valid ground to disturb the impugned order of the Commission in exercise of the jurisdiction under article 136. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7785 OF 2002 AND I.A. NO. 5 OF 2004 - - - Dated:- 17-12-2004 - P. VENKATARAMA REDDY AND A.K. MATHUR, JJ. R.F. Nariman, Arvind K. Sharma and Naresh Kumar for the Appellant. Anil B. Divan, Ravinder Narain, Aditya Narain, Sanjeev Dahiya and Rajan Narain for the Respondent. JUDGMENT P. Venkatarama Reddy, J. - This appeal by special leave is preferred against the order dated 4-9-2000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the main enquiry and that there was no prima facie ground to grant interim relief, especially, having regard to the fact that the applicants were protected against cancellation of allotment by virtue of the undertaking given by the respondent in this behalf. 4. Another miscellaneous application was filed sometime later purportedly under section 12A of the Act to handover the possession of the flat. It was contended therein that in spite of depositing an extra amount over and above the instalment payable as per the agreement, the respondent had refused to handover the possession. This application having been rejected by the impugned order, the SLP was filed. Though section 55 of the Act provides for an appeal to this Court against an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to conform to the conditions imposed in the interim order of this Court in the civil appeals referred to supra on the ground that the said case was distinguishable. However, the Commission found, prima facie , that there was no distinguishing feature. 6. After the miscellaneous application was disposed of, considerable progress was made in regard to the enquiry and some witnesses were also examined. On 22-11-2002, this Court granted leave and the original record has been requisitioned. Therefore, the further enquiry has not concluded. While so, the appellants filed I.A. No. 4 of 2003 in the first instance seeking an interim order to direct the respondent to handover the possession of flats on the appellants furnishing adequate se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the interest on extra charges, that too at a high rate, when the extra charges themselves is the subject-matter of dispute. He also demurred to the demand of maintenance charges, even without delivery of flat. We put it to the respondent s counsel that the respondent may receive the amounts due towards items 2 3 subject to the deposit of amount payable under the item No. 4 i.e. delayed interest on extra charges with the Commission and then deliver possession, without prejudice to the respective contentions. The learned senior counsel for the respondent has however not agreed for this course and he wants the full payment to the last paisa before possession is handed over. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the Commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
