RSA No. 2959 of 2007 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No. 2959 of 2007 Date of Decision: 17.8.2009 Navtej Singh ......Appellant Versus The Amritsar Improvement Trust, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar. .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri R.K. Dadwal, Advocate, for the appellant. Shri Manish Bansal, Advocate, for the respondent. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral). The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby the suit for declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to allotment and transfer of flat No. 18-GF, Ajnala Road, Development Scheme Block-A, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, was dismissed. The respondent-Trust floated a Self Financing Scheme for allotment of flats for the Higher Income Group (HIG). The plaintiff had applied for allotment of such flat by submitting an application dated 29.2.1996 along with a sum of Rs.85,000/-. Vide letter dated 4.6.1996, the plaintiff-appellant was allotted flat No. 18-GF in the aforesaid Scheme at RSA No. 2959 of 2007 (2) the tentative cost of Rs.8,50,000/-. 1/4th of the cost i.e., Rs.2,12,500/- was to be deposited by the appellant. After adjusting the amount already deposited, the appellant was to deposit a sum of Rs.1,27,500/- towards 1/4th of the costs of flat. As per the terms of the allotment letter, such amount was to be deposited within 30 days of the issue of allotment letter. Admittedly, the appellant has not deposited the aforesaid amount, as such vide letter Exhibit D.2, the allotment was cancelled. The entire case of the appellant is based upon a Resolution dated 16.1.1997 Exhibit D.3, wherein the Trust has resolved to give another opportunity to all those defaulters, who have not deposited the balance amount, to deposit the same within 30 days. The said Resolution when translated into English reads as under:- “Resolution No.8 The Trust has resolved that draw of lots of 72 flats under the Self Financing Scheme, which are to be constructed in Block-A at Ajnala Road, was held. Now, the work of construction of the said flats has started. The allottees of the Flats be informed through publication in the newspapers and letters to deposit the balance amount along with interest within 30 days, failing which interest, penal interest and penalty shall be charged from them. In this regard immediate publication be made in the newspapers.” Learned counsel for the appellant has also relied upon an advertisement issued by the Improvement Trust in pursuance of the said Resolution, which is to the effect that all those allottees, who have not deposited 1/4th of the initial amount, are to be granted time for the payment of the said amount. Both the Courts have dismissed the suit holding that since the RSA No. 2959 of 2007 (3) plaintiff has failed to deposit the balance amount within 30 days of the issuance of the letter of allotment, therefore, the plaintiff cannot rely upon Resolution dated 16.1.1997 as it pertains to deposit of the balance sale consideration in view of the factum of the construction raised by the Trust. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, I do not find any merit in the present appeal. Since the appellant has not deposited 1/4th of the amount in terms of the allotment letter, no right accrues in favour of the appellant. It is only on deposit of the said amount, it could be said that the appellant has any interest in the property. The Resolution dated 16.1.1997 is not applicable in respect of the plaintiff or such other applicants. It is applicable to those allottees, who have deposited the amount and are eligible for possession of the same. The said Resolution contemplates that the construction is in progress. The deposit of amount is so as to take possession of the flats. The advertisement relied upon by the appellant is an un-authenticated advertisement. Such un-authenticated advertisement will not bind the Trust for any declaration sought for by the plaintiff- appellant. Consequently, I do not find any patent illegality or material irregularity in the finding recorded or that the finding recorded gives rise to any substantial question of law in the present second appeal. Hence, the present appeal is dismissed. (Hemant Gupta) 17.8.2009 Judge ds