A city court has pulled up the Delhi Development Authority for refusing to return Rs 5.2 lakh to an Air Force officer’s widow, who has complained that she was sold a shop with a smaller area than promised.

Ordering the DDA to pay back the money along with six per cent interest, Additional District Judge (ADJ) Kamini Lau said the civic agency could not take shelter behind the “as is where is” agreement and thereby claim that the complainant should have physically inspected the shop before entering into a deal with them.

An “as is where is” agreement means one will get a property at the location where it is and in the condition it is presently in. But the court held that this does not imply innocent purchasers will end up incurring the loss of space and other features related to property even though they have been tricked into entering a purchase agreement by misrepresentation and fraud.

“In this case, the DDA has misled and induced purchasers into buying a 12.4-sq m shop by showing the same as measuring 19.27 sq m in their advertisement. This is a clear case of fraud having being played upon a prospective purchaser, who, under these circumstances, is fully justified in rescinding the agreement,” the court held in a recent order.

Dismissing the DDA’s contention regarding a physical inspection by petitioner Alka Ahuja (42), ADJ Lau said when the agency’s officials had admitted that the shop was under their lock and key, it was illogical to say she chose not to inspect the shop and was at fault for not being vigilant.

... contd.