Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices = unfair trade practice - (i) The Board will allot one flat to the appellant in Jodhpur in Board's Middle Income Group “B” Housing Scheme. (ii) The appellant will pay the price of the flat selected by him as per the approved Government's price prevalent and in force as on the date of this judgment. (iii) The Board will adjust a sum of Rs.19,600/- + interest @12% per annum to be calculated on Rs. 19,600/- from the date of its payment by the appellant to the Board till the date of execution of sale deed by the Board in appellant’s favour from the total price and after giving adjustment of the said amount, i.e.,(principal amount Rs.19,600/- and interest) the balance would be considered as final price payable by the appellant to the Board for purchase of flat. (iv) In other words, the appellant will pay a total price of the flat to the Board after deducting Rs.19,600/- + interest to be calculated @ 12 % p.a. on Rs.19,600/- 7 from the date the said payment was made by the appellant to the Board till the date of execution of sale deed of the flat. (v) The Board will accordingly work out the price of the flat, as directed above, and inform the appellant. (vi) If the appellant deposits the entire sale consideration, as directed above, within the time fixed by the Board in the notice sent to the appellant, the Board will execute the sale deed in favour of the appellant and also in favour of appellant's first blood relation jointly along with the appellant, in case, the appellant expresses his wish to allow any of his blood relation to join with him as co-owner in execution of the sale deed. It is because it was stated at the bar that the appellant is now quite aged. This liberty is, therefore, granted to the appellant. (vii) If the appellant fails to pay the price within the time fixed by the Board then a sum of Rs.19,600/- deposited by the 8 appellant with the Board shall stand forfeited. (viii) Let all the formalities, as directed above, be completed within 6 months from the date of receipt of this judgment by the parties under intimation to both as an outer limit to give quietus to this litigation with no claim of any kind surviving against both the parties for future. 13) In view of foregoing directions, we do not consider it necessary to examine the legal issues arising in the case.

1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. 2832 OF 2007
Daulat Singh Rathore ...Appellant(s)
VERSUS
Rajasthan Housing Board ….Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.
1) This appeal is filed against the final judgment
and order dated 20.02.2006 passed by the
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices
Commission, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as
“MRTP Commission”) in UTPE No. 207 of 1998
whereby the MRTP Commission disposed of the
complaint and discharged the notice of enquiry
2
holding that the allegation of unfair trade practice
against the respondent are not proved.
2) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.
They, however, need mention infra to appreciate the
short issue involved in the appeal.
3) The Respondent herein is a State Housing
Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board"). The
Board is constituted for the State of Rajasthan
under the Rajasthan Housing Board Act, 1970
(hereinafter referred to as “the Act").
4) Pursuant to the Schemes introduced by the
Board for sale of different types of Houses/flats in
the city of Jodhpur, the Board invited applications
from public at large in the year 1982 for sale of
different categories of the houses/flats.
5) The appellant made an application on
27.12.1982 (Annexure-P-1) to the Board for
allotment of one flat to him at Jodhpur under a
Scheme called, Middle Income Group "B" category.
3
On 30.05.1983, the appellant deposited a sum of
Rs.4,600/- as registration amount and then
deposited a sum of Rs.15,000/- on 18.09.1993
being first instalment.
6) Thereafter, there arose disputes between the
appellant and the Board for sale of the flat which, in
the first instance, led to filing of the petition being
Writ Petition No.4707/1993 by the appellant in the
High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur. By order
dated 04.05.1995, the High Court dismissed the
writ petition as having rendered infructuous.
7) The appellant then took recourse to two
remedies for ventilating his grievance against the
Board. He filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 23/2001
in the Court of ADJ(I) at Jodhpur on 02.07.2001
challenging therein the actions of the Board and
simultaneously filed a complaint being UTPE No.
207/1998 before the MRTP Commission, New
Delhi against the Board.
4
8) So far as the suit is concerned, it is still
pending and so far as the complaint is concerned, it
was dismissed by the MRTP Commission by
impugned order dated 20.02.2006 giving rise to
filing of this appeal by way of special leave by the
appellant in this Court. This Court granted leave
on 17.05.2007.
9) On 11.08.2016, this Court recorded in the
proceeding that the appellant has given a proposal
to the Board for reconsideration of his case for
allotment of the flat. This Court observed that the
Board should look into the appellant's proposal with
objectivity and call the appellant personally to
resolve the dispute out of the Court. On 19.10.2016,
learned counsel for the respondent made a
statement that the Board has decided to allot one
flat to the appellant and the details of the same
would be placed on record within 2 weeks. On
23.03.2017, this Court wanted to find out the prices
5
of the flats between 2005 to 2010. The Board has
accordingly placed on record the details of the
prices of the flats.
10) It is in the light of these background facts, the
question arises as to what order needs to be passed
for the disposal of the appeal.
11) Having heard the learned counsel for the
parties and on perusing the record of the case and
further keeping in view the nature of the
controversy, stand taken by the both parties and
lastly, the interim orders passed by this Court on
various dates mentioned above, we are of the
considered opinion that this appeal can be disposed
of finally by passing the following directions.
12) In our opinion, the directions given
hereinbelow would balance the equities between the
parties and also safeguard their interest in relation
to the subject matter of the appeal. The following
are the directions:
6
(i) The Board will allot one flat to the
appellant in Jodhpur in Board's Middle
Income Group “B” Housing Scheme.
(ii) The appellant will pay the price of
the flat selected by him as per the
approved Government's price prevalent
and in force as on the date of this
judgment.
(iii) The Board will adjust a sum of
Rs.19,600/- + interest @12% per annum
to be calculated on Rs. 19,600/- from
the date of its payment by the appellant
to the Board till the date of execution of
sale deed by the Board in appellant’s
favour from the total price and after
giving adjustment of the said amount,
i.e.,(principal amount Rs.19,600/- and
interest) the balance would be considered
as final price payable by the appellant to
the Board for purchase of flat.
(iv) In other words, the appellant will
pay a total price of the flat to the Board
after deducting Rs.19,600/- + interest to
be calculated @ 12 % p.a. on Rs.19,600/-
7
from the date the said payment was made
by the appellant to the Board till the date
of execution of sale deed of the flat.
(v) The Board will accordingly work out
the price of the flat, as directed above,
and inform the appellant.
(vi) If the appellant deposits the entire
sale consideration, as directed above,
within the time fixed by the Board in the
notice sent to the appellant, the Board
will execute the sale deed in favour of the
appellant and also in favour of appellant's
first blood relation jointly along with the
appellant, in case, the appellant
expresses his wish to allow any of his
blood relation to join with him as
co-owner in execution of the sale deed. It
is because it was stated at the bar that
the appellant is now quite aged. This
liberty is, therefore, granted to the
appellant.
(vii) If the appellant fails to pay the price
within the time fixed by the Board then a
sum of Rs.19,600/- deposited by the
8
appellant with the Board shall stand
forfeited.
(viii) Let all the formalities, as directed
above, be completed within 6 months
from the date of receipt of this judgment
by the parties under intimation to both as
an outer limit to give quietus to this
litigation with no claim of any kind
surviving against both the parties for
future.
13) In view of foregoing directions, we do not
consider it necessary to examine the legal issues
arising in the case.
14) The appeal stands disposed of finally.
…...……..................................J.
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]
………...................................J.
[NAVIN SINHA]
New Delhi;
December 04, 2017