Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATISH KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satish Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors - CWP-13249-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 3307 (19 May 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYAN AT CHANDIGRH

C.M. No.14574 of 2006 and

C.W.P.No.13249 of 2005

Date of decision: May 15,2006

Satish Kumar V. State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

Present: Ms.Deepali Puri,Advocate,for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral)

Written statement on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 filed in court today is taken on record. A copy thereof has been handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The facts which emerge from the record show that the plot in question belonging to the petitioner had been ordered to be resumed on account of non-payment of the outstanding dues. The petitioner filed an appeal before the appellate authority. The appellate authority vide order dated June 28,2003 allowed the aforesaid appeal and ordered the restoration of the site in question to the petitioner on the conditions that all the outstanding dues along with interest and penalty of Rs,10,000/- were to be deposited by him within three months from the date the said order was conveyed to him by the Estate Officer. It appears that there has been some delay in depositing the aforesaid amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has since deposited all the aforesaid outstanding dues along with penalty and interest etc.

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by petitioner that the aforesaid amount which was due against him was deposited by him, we allow the present petitioner and direct that the payment so deposited by the petitioner shall be taken to be due compliance of the order dated June 28,2003 passed by the Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana. The delay in making the aforesaid amount is condoned. However, if any further amount is still due towards the petitioner, the respondent-authority shall communicate the same to the petitioner in this regard. On receipt of the aforesaid communication, the petitioner would be required to pay the said outstanding dues within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the aforesaid communication.

A copy of the order be given dasti on usual charges.

( Viney Mittal )

Judge

May 15,2006 ( H.S.Bhalla )

sks Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.