AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SHRI Dalip Mehra, counsel for petitioner present and respondent no. 1 is present in person. Arguments heard. M/s. Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. (OP), allotted one flat i.e. 124 Pocket, CSFS, Sarita Vihar, in favour of Shri S.M. Sapru. Shri A.L. Baweja purchased the allotment of this house from Shri S.M. Sapru for Rs.11,50,000/ -, on 13.03.1997. The OP, thereafter, having the transfer charges, transferred the allotment in favour of the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant was asked to pay bank draft in the sum of Rs.1,44,625/ - for the purpose of registration of conveyance deed. However, later on, the OP raised a demand for the payment of Rs.1,24,625/ - for stamp duty charges. The said demand is the bone of contention between the parties.
ACCORDING to OP, they have returned the amount of Rs.1,44,625/ - to the complainant against stamp duty vide letter dated 28.08.1997 and it further requested to send draft in the sum of Rs.1,24,625/ -.
THE original cost of flat is Rs.9,97,000/ -, which was sold in favour of Shri S.M. Sapru and according to the petitioner, the registration charges were to be paid by him separately. Counsel for petitioner invited our attention to the agreement entered between the OP and the allottee, wherein it is specifically and clearly stated that the registration and stamp duty charges has to be paid by the buyer and the said agreement was with Shri S.M. Sapru. Counsel for petitioner further submitted that the complainant has stepped into the shoes of the original allottee. We find no force in the arguments advanced by the counsel for petitioner. The fora below have seen the Statement of Account. The observation made by the State Commission is reproduced below:
"The contention raised on behalf of the appellant -opposite party is without any force for the reason that in the statement of account balance payable towards the flat in question at the time of its transfer in the name of the complainant was shown as "NIL", meaning thereby the original allotteee had already paid the entire amount towards the flat in question."
THE OP has failed to prove that while the allotment was being transferred, they asked the new purchaser that he would have to pay registration charges and stamp duty charges. The record also shows that the stamp duty charges @ 12.5% was paid by Mr. S. M. Sapru in the sum of Rs.1,29,675/ -. When the case was transferred in the name of the complainant, that amount should not have been returned without the permission of the new buyer, who had stepped into shoes of previous allottee. There is no proof that the said amount was returned. The payment made to the previous allottee clearly goes to show that the OP was working in cahoots with the previous allottee. The previous allottee cannot get a single paisa without the permission of the transferee that too, after the transfer.
HENCE , the revision petition is dismissed. It is to be assumed that the complainant must have parted with Rs.11,50,000/ - knowing well that he has not to pay any other amount in respect of purchase of that flat.
IT is further directed that the registration be done without payment of any cost within 45 days from today, otherwise penalty will be imposed upon the OP in the sum of 500/ - per day, subject to the condition that this order will not be in respect of any other liability or rights.