Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

WASSAN SINGH & ORS versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


WASSAN SINGH & Ors v. THE STATE OF PUNJAB & Ors - CWP-20353-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 4758 (25 July 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CASE NO.: CWP No.20353 of 2005

DATE OF DECISION: July 21, 2006

WASSAN SINGH AND OTHERS ...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV.

PRESENT: MR. GURNAM SINGH, ADVOCATE WITH MR. S.S. JOSHI, ADVOCATEFOR THE PETITIONERS.

MR. C.M. MUNJAL, SR.ADDL.A.G., PUNJAB.

MR. RAKESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.7.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J. (ORAL)

The petitioners have filed a petition under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act wherein it was prayed that they are the owners of the suit land. The petition was dismissed by the Collector, Kapurthala. The petitioners have challenged the order of the Collector before the Commissioner. However, no stay was granted to the petitioners. In the meantime, the Gram Panchayat has initiated proceedings for auctioning the land. It is against this order that the petitioners have approached this Court.

Mr. Gurnam Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as long as the appeal filed by the petitioners is pending, the land in dispute should not be auctioned. It is contended that the petitioners are in possession of the suit land.

Mr. C.M. Munjal, Sr.Addl.A.G., Punjab, however, controverts this assertion and contends that it is the Gram Panchayat who is in occupation of the suit land.

Be that as it may, as the appeal of the petitioners before Joint Development Commissioner, Punjab, Kapurthala is pending and is fixed for 9.8.2006, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioners on that very day i.e., on 9.8.2006, or in any case one month thereafter. Till the appeal is not decided, status quo with regard to possession be maintained by the parties.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)

JUDGE

July 21, 2006 (NIRMAL YADAV)

Gulati 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.