HUDA's multiple appeals cause unnecessary delay and expense, Supreme Court imposes cost of INR 1,00,000 on appellants

Issue: Whether the demand of additional price made by the Haryana Urban Development Authority from the allottees of a plot of land was justified, and whether the appeal filed by the appellants despite a previous judgment on the same issue was justified. Cost

On 8 May 2023, in Case titled HUDA Vs Jagdeep Singh , Supreme Court of India has dismissed an appeal filed by Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) against a lower court's order quashing the demand of additional price from an allottee. The court observed that despite the judgment in the Sanjay Gera case, the Appellants filed multiple appeals, resulting in addition to the pendency of cases and causing unnecessary delay and expense to the respondent. Therefore, the court imposed a cost of INR 1,00,000 on the appellants to be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre and awarded a cost of INR 50,000 to the respondent. The court also ordered the appellants to recover the costs from the officers/officials responsible for the appeals, and to calculate and recover the expenses incurred on the litigation in the form of the fee of counsels and allied expenses, as well as expenses for the officers who visited the counsel.

In the instant case, the plot was allotted in the same sector as in Sanjay Gera's case, and additional price was demanded from the allottee. The court noted that in Sanjay Gera's case, the court had accepted the plea and quashed the demand of additional price from the allottee, interpreting the same condition in the letter of allotment as in the present case. The court reiterated that the condition for enhancement of price can be invoked only when there is an award by the competent authority under the Land Acquisition Act, and in the absence of any such award, the enhancement of price is not warranted.

The court observed that in the present case, the civil suit challenging the demand of additional price was filed by the respondent in 2003, and the judgment in Sanjay Gera's case was delivered in 2005, yet the appellants contested the suit and filed multiple appeals, causing unnecessary delay and expense to the respondent. The court held that the appellants had an impersonal and irresponsible attitude, wanting to put everything to court and shirking to take decisions. The court directed the appellants to recover the costs from the officers/officials responsible for the appeals, who despite the judgment of the court dealing with the same issue opined the case to be fit for filing appeals.

Finally, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellants to deposit the amount of cost in the Supreme Court Mediation Centre and pay it to the respondent within two months from the date of the order. The court also ordered the appellants to calculate and recover the expenses incurred on the litigation in the form of the fee of counsels and allied expenses, as well as expenses for the officers who visited the counsel within six months. The appellants were directed to file an affidavit of compliance with the court.

8 May 2023, 

HUDA Vs Jagdeep Singh