Summary
The Housing Board refused transfer and registration of a fully paid house to the allottee’s grandson because of longstanding variations in the original allottee’s initials and spelling. The Court rejected the inference of fraud where those discrepancies had existed when the Board accepted the father’s succession, executed tenancy and hire-purchase agreements and received every instalment. It restored the Single Judge’s relief and ordered registration subject to formalities.
Issues
- Whether longstanding name discrepancies justified refusing transfer and inferring fraud despite the Board’s earlier recognition and complete payment.
Held
- The variations in initials and spelling existed from the original allotment and when the Board accepted the appellant’s father as successor and executed the tenancy and lease-cum-sale agreements. They did not support the Division Bench’s inference of fraud on this record. (¶ 5-7)
- After receiving all instalments and recognising the family’s occupation for decades without another claimant, the Board acted unfairly in relying on those same discrepancies to refuse the grandson’s request. The factual circumstances and the family’s illiteracy required realistic consideration. (¶¶ 5, 7)
- The Single Judge’s relief should be restored, with a deed of transfer and registration in the appellant’s favour subject to completion of necessary formalities. (¶ 8)
Result
Appeal allowed; the Division Bench’s judgment was set aside and the Single Judge’s judgment restored. The Board was directed to execute and register the transfer deed within two months of receipt of the order, subject to necessary formalities. No costs.