Summary
Persistent default in premium instalments and ground rent despite twenty-six opportunities justified action against a commercial booth allottee; business difficulties did not excuse the default. The High Court’s unconditional relief was set aside. Balancing the parties’ interests in the particular circumstances, the Court nevertheless permitted confirmation of allotment upon payment of the booth’s 2010 value, less credited payments, within six months. That tailored relief was expressly denied precedential effect.
Issues
- Whether repeated payment defaults justified cancellation despite the allottee’s plea of hardship.
- What conditional relief should be granted on the particular facts.
Held
- A slump in business did not excuse failure to pay the three instalments and ground rent despite repeated opportunities. Consistent default permitted lawful action by the competent authority; the allottee could not insist on the original 1996 price after years of default. (¶¶ 8, 10–11)
- Teri Oat Estates concerned substantial payments, including interest, and did not justify the High Court’s relief without proper regard to the persistent defaults here. (¶ 9–10)
- The Court balanced the Administration’s and allottee’s interests by adopting the 2010 booth value of Rs.12,77,950 rather than the current value. Credited payments of Rs.2,52,000 reduced the balance to Rs.10,25,950; property tax paid during enjoyment of the booth was not adjustable. (¶ 11–12)
- Payment within six months would require confirmation and execution of documents at the allottee’s expense. Default would permit lawful eviction. This arrangement was confined to the peculiar facts and was not to be cited as precedent. (¶ 13)
Result
Appeal allowed and High Court order set aside. Allottee given six months to pay Rs.10,25,950 for confirmation and execution of documents at his expense; otherwise Administration may proceed with eviction according to law. Relief expressly confined to this case.