Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

JOGINDER SINGH & ORS versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Joginder Singh & Ors v. State of Punjab & Ors - CM-3958-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 4850 (27 July 2006)

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM No.3958 of 2006 and

CWP NO.953 of 2005

DATE OF DECISION: July 20, 2006

Joginder Singh and others

....Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

PRESENT: Shri Sanjay Bansal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Shri Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the PUDA.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).

Prayer made in the present application is allowed.

Annexures P.10 and P.11 are taken on record.

At the outset, Shri Sanjay Bansal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the petitioners were allotted alternative plots in the year 2001. The petitioners have also deposited 25% of the costs of the aforesaid plot. However, the actual physical possession of the plots has not been handed over to the petitioners so far. Shri Bansal, however, concedes that besides 25% of the costs of the plots, remaining amount has not been deposited by the petitioners so far. In these circumstances, Shri Bansal states that the petitioners shall deposit the entire sale consideration with regard to the aforesaid plots on or before August 10,2006 with the competent authority. Shri Bansal, however, requests that the petitioners be granted some CM No.3958 of 2006 and

breathing time to vacate the residential houses, which are in occupation of the petitioners.

Shri Sanjeev Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-PUDA states that the possession of the plots shall be handed over to the allottee within a period of one week of the deposit of the remaining amount by such allottees.

In view of the aforesaid statement of the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of the present petition with a liberty to the petitioners to deposit the entire balance amount of consideration with regard to the allotted plots on or before August 10,2006. Within one week thereafter, the actual physical possession of the said plots shall be handed over to the allottees. The allottees shall be entitled to remain in possession of the existing residential houses upto September 30,2006. After the aforesaid date, the respondents would be at liberty to demolish the said houses.

At this stage, we also note an undertaking given by Shri Sanjay Bansal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the petitioners shall have no claim on the residential houses in their occupation after September 30,2006 and shall voluntarily and willingly vacate the same.

We also make it clear that in any case the entire sale consideration is not deposited by the allottees on or before August 10,2006, then in such a situation, the allotment made in their favour CM No.3958 of 2006 and

with regard to the plots in question shall automatically stand cancelled and the present petition shall also be deemed to have been dismissed.

(Viney Mittal)

Judge

July 20,2006 (H.S. Bhalla)

KD 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.