Supreme Court Strikes Down Expulsion of Bihar MLC as Disproportionate, Orders Immediate Reinstatement Private Banks Not Subject to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Allegation of Forgery is Not Enough: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute When a Case is Made Out for Bail, Courts Should Not Hesitate: Kerala High Court Allows Bail Despite Commercial Quantity of Drugs Seized Retailers Cannot Be Prosecuted for Manufacturer’s Fault" – Karnataka High Court Quashes Case Against Pesticide Dealers Mere Issuance of a Cheque Does Not Prove Legally Enforceable Debt": Delhi High Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonor Case Courts Cannot Ignore Urgent Repairs When Public Safety is at Stake: Calcutta High Court Upholds Trial Court's Order Mutation Entries Do Not Confer Ownership: Bombay High Court Rejects Premature Dismissal of Partition Suit No Substantial Question of Law – High Court Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court Injunction Cannot Be Granted Without Proof of Possession: Allahabad High Court Quashes Relief in Land Dispute Section 197 CrPC | Sanction for Prosecution is a Shield, Not a Sword: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against BIS Officer Landlord is the Best Judge of His Needs: Supreme Court Orders Eviction in Favor of Landowner Vijaya Bank TT Scam | Supreme Court Acquits Jeweller in ₹6.7 Crore Vijaya Bank Fraud Case, Orders Return of 205 Gold Bars Procurement Preference for Small Enterprises is a Legal Mandate, Not a Mere Policy: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of MSMEs Revisional Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked Against Interlocutory Orders of Commercial Courts: Orissa High Court Declares Section 8 Bar Absolute Victim’s Testimony Must Be of Sterling Quality to Be Sole Basis of Conviction: Kerala High Court Reduces Sentence of Pastor Convicted for Repeated Rape of Minor Providing Set-Top Boxes to Subscribers Constitutes Sale”: Karnataka High Court Upholds VAT on Tata Play Limited Mere Registration of FIR Cannot Justify Denial of Passport Renewal: Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court

Supreme Court dismisses Belgaum Urban Development Authority's appeal over demand of additional price for allotted plots

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, has dismissed the appeal filed by the Belgaum Urban Development Authority (BUDA) challenging the demand of additional price for plots allotted to respondents in the case of Dhruva & Anr. v. Belgaum Urban Development Authority. The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindal, resolved a bunch of appeals arising from the common judgment of the High Court in R.S.A. Nos. 759, 760, and 864 of 2008.

The dispute centered around the demand of additional price by BUDA from the respondents, who were allotted residential plots. BUDA claimed that the demand was justified due to the enhancement of compensation for the land on which the plots were carved out. However, the respondents argued that there were no specific clauses in the allotment letter or the lease-cum-sale agreement allowing BUDA to demand additional price except for variations in plot size.

After considering the arguments presented by both parties, the Supreme Court analyzed relevant case law, including the judgments in Ishwar Dass Nassa v. State of Haryana and Preeta Singh (Km) v. Haryana Urban Development Authority. The court observed that the clauses in the allotment letter and the lease-cum-sale agreement did not explicitly authorize BUDA to demand additional price on the grounds of enhanced compensation for land acquisition.

Justice Rajesh Bindal, in the judgment, held that the demand made by BUDA for additional price was not justified based on the clauses in the agreements. The court concluded that the allottees were not liable to pay the additional price demanded by BUDA.

Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals filed by BUDA, upholding the judgment of the High Court. The court clarified that any future litigation initiated by other allottees who had already paid the additional price would be considered, taking into account the delay, laches, and principles of acquiescence.

Dhruva & Anr. v. Belgaum Urban Development Authority

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/28-Apr-2023-BELGAUM-URBAN-DEVELOPMENT-AUTHORITY-Vs-Dhruva.pdf"]

 

Similar News