SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 1908

K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, V.N.KHARE
Roochira Ceramics – Appellant
Versus
H. U. D. A – Respondent


(1) THE appellant herein was allotted an Industrial plot bearing No. 5-B situated in Sector 15A at Faridabad by the Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority). The order of allotment indicated that in case of default of payment of instalments towards the final price, the interest at the rate of 10% shall be charged. It appears that the appellant committed default in payment of instalments, with the result the Estate Officer, Faridabad by an order dated 7-4-1995 in exercise of power under S. 17(4) of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act resumed the plot of land and also forfeited a sum of Rs.1.90 lakhs deposited by the appellant. The appellant aggrieved against the order of the Estate Officer preferred an appeal before the Administrator of the Authority. The said appeal was dismissed. Thereafter the appellant filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and prayed for quashing of the order passed by the Estate Officer and that of the Administrator rejecting his appeal. The High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Authority to release the land In favour of the a






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top