RAMCHANDER vs UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 315/2025 & CM APPL. 29498/2025 RAMCHANDER ...Appellant Through: Mr. Anil Goel, Mr. Aditya Goel and Ms. Pranjal Sharma, Advocates. (Through VC). versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ...Respondents Through: Mr. Om Prakash, SPC, Mr. Chandresh Pratap, Ms. Swati Mishra and Mr. Nitish Pande, Advocates. Date of Decision: 15th May, 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA JUDGEMENT TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J : (ORAL) 1. Present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed assailing the judgement dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition bearing W.P.(C) 2839/2020 filed by the appellant and further seeking direction to the respondents to refund the amount of Rs.5,54,079/- along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of payment of the said extra amount till realization in full, to the appellant, along with exemplary costs. 2. The appellant entered into a Lease Agreement with the Railways on 09.06.2008, for leasing parcel space in brake vans in Train No.2280-R Ex. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed LPA 315/2025 Page 1 of 10 By:MADHU SARDANA Signing Date:20.05.2025 16:36:42 HNZM to JHS, for a period of three years with a clause for extension of lease by a further period of two years. The lease rate was Rs.5,114/- per day. Clause 18.1 of the Agreement provided for extension of the lease by two years at a lease rate of 25% more than the lump sum lease freight rate. 3. The case of the appellant is that on 17.01.2011, he sent a request for extension of lease period for two years and offered to pay 25% extra freight i.e. Rs.6,392.50/- however, the Railways did not extend the Lease Agreement despite several reminders which constrained the appellant to file a petition bearing