Kiran Arora v. Vijay Kamra & ORS

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 689/2017 & C.M. 36134/2017 KIRAN ARORA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Abhimanyu Singla, Advocate

Versus

VIJAY KAMRA & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Rajeev Viz, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Sarat Chandra, Advocate for respondent No.2-DDA Mr. Devesh Singh, Addl. Standing Counsel for GNCTD with Ms. Sukriti Ghai & Ms. Urvashi Tripathi, Advocates for respondent No.3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 04.12.2018 Vide order of 5th July, 2017 (Annexure P/4), respondents were directed to conduct draw of lots from out of the vacant flats available for allotment of a flat to petitioner as per her entitlement. In the reply filed by respondent No.2-DDA, it is disclosed that Flat No.63-C, Jyoti CGHS Ltd., B-2, Sector-14 Extension, Rohini, Delhi-110085 has been allotted to petitioner in the draw of lots held on 1st November, 2017. RespondentSociety has raised maintenance charges etc. vide Demand Notice of 1st January, 2018, which are to the tune of `5,45,581/-. Petitioner's counsel disputes the payment of aforesaid charges by drawing attention of this Court to Order of 1st December, 2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by a Division Bench of this Court, wherein it is noticed that Page | 2

the admitted position is that petitioner has paid sum of `6,22,900/- and this payment includes other ancillary charges as well. Learned counsel for first respondent disputes that petitioner has paid the maintenance charges etc. to the tune of `5,45,581/-. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that without going into the aspect of payment of maintenance charges etc, petitioner is ready to deposit sum of `5,75,000/- (which includes maintenance charges upto date) by way of fixed deposit receipt with respondent-Society and dispute regarding the payment of maintenance charges is referable for arbitration as per Section 70 of The Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003.

Counsel for first respondent submits that maintenance charges cannot be deposited by way of fixed deposit receipt and petitioner can pay it under protest and have recourse to Section 70 of The Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003.

Upon hearing and on perusal of orders referred to above and the material on record, it is directed that possession of the flat so allotted to petitioner be handed over to petitioner by respondent-Society forthwith, provided petitioner deposits sum of `5,75,000/- with respondent-Society, which of course shall be subject to arbitration, in case petitioner raises dispute in respect of maintenance charges etc. With aforesaid directions, this petition and application are accordingly disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE DECEMBER 04, 2018 r Page | 3