R.V.RAVEENDRAN, MARKANDEY KATJU
U. T. Chandigarh Administration – Appellant
Versus
Amarjeet Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
R.V. Raveendran, J. —
Leave granted in the special leave petitions. These appeals are filed by Union Territory of Chandigarh (for short ‘UT Chandigarh’). C.A. Nos.1994 of 2006 and 1995 of 2006 are filed against a common order dated 21.2.2005 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“National Commission” for short). Other appeals are filed against the common order dated 21.2.2007 passed by the National Commission following the earlier order dated 21.2.2005. By these orders, the lease premium instalments have been rescheduled and certain reliefs have been granted in regard to interest, to the lessees - respondents (who had secured leasehold interest in sites belonging to UT Chandigarh in public auctions held by it).
FACTS OF THE CASE
2. As the facts are similar, we will refer to the facts of only one case (CA No.1994/2006 arising from FA No.499/2003 on the file of the National Commission). The Estate Officer, Union Territory Chandigarh Administration issued an advertisement notifying the auction of 74 residential sites and 71 commercial sites in different sectors of Chandigarh, on leasehold basis subject to the General Terms and Conditions regarding auc
Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh
Shanti Kunj Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. U.T. Administration Chandigarh
Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta
Sector - 6, Bahadurgarh Plot Holders Association v. State of Haryana
Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh v. Shanti Kunj Investment (P) Ltd.
Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh v. Shantikunj Investments Pvt. Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.