Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATBIR SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satbir Singh v. State of Haryana - CWP-10977-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 4690 (24 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 10977 OF 2005

DATE OF DECISION: July 27, 2006

Parties Name

Satbir Singh

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

State of Haryana

...RESPONDENT

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL

PRESENT: R.S.Tacoria,

Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Mamta Singhal Talwar, A.A.G., Haryana JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral)

JUDGMENT

Petitioner was a successful bidder and in the auction in dispute, one plot was allotted to him. He deposited 25% of the price, by way of earnest money. However, subsequent thereto, on account of stay granted by this Court in some writ petition, possession of the plot, purchased by him was not delivered. After waiting for some time, petitioner moved an application to respondent No. 3 to refund the amount, deposited by him, along with interest. That prayer was not conceded. Hence this writ petition.

Counsel for the petitioner states that the other purchasers, who were similarly situated, had also asked for refund of the earnest money.

Their prayer was declined. They came to this Court by filing Civil Writ Petition No. 3047 of 2003, which was disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated August 8, 2005. Directions were issued to respondent No. 3 to refund the deposit made by the auction purchasers, along with interest at the same rate as was being charged by respondent No.

3 on delayed payment. This Court is of the view that the facts of this case are similar to the one, as were agitated in C.W.P. No. 3047 of 2003. None has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No. 3 to oppose this writ petition, accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in the same terms as in C.W.P. No. 3047 of 2003 (Ramesh Kumar and others v. State of Haryana), decided on August 8, 2005.

( Jasbir Singh )

Judge

( Pritam Pal )

July 27, 2006. Judge

DKC


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.