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

2006 Supreme(HP) 98

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
K.C.SOOD
SURINDER SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF H.P. - Respondent
CWP Nos. 296 and 405 of 2000
Decided On : 04/10/2006

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. G.C. Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mohinder Gautam, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Ashok Chaudhary, Additional Advocate General for Respondents No. 1 to 4. Mr. Bhupender Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate for Respondents No. 5 to 7.

JUDGEMENT

K.C. Sood, J:- This judgment shall dispose of these two petitions under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India as both the petitions arise out of a common order of the Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Relief and rehabilitation also exercising the revisional jurisdiction under the displaced persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as the "Act". Relevant facts.

2. Late Sardar Santosh Singh; father and predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner Surinder Singh, being displaced person, purchased the property known as "31 Cosy Nook Estate", Shimla in an auction held on September 11,1954 by the District Rent and Managing Officer, Ambala. This property was an Evacuee Property and was placed in the Evacuee Property Pool having been vested in the Central Government under sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Act. The property was purchased by Sardar Santosh Singh for a sum of rupees 52,000/-. The boundaries of the property sold in auction were described as follows: East: East Municipal Road: West: West Fountain Blue Villa. North: Fountain Bleau Hotel. South: Municipal Road. 3.The description of the property in the Sale Certificate (Annexure-P1) is "31 COSY NOOK ESTATE", SHIMLA, including 3 tankies, latrine, verandah, common in between Fountain Blue and two stairs, common khasra Nos. 602, 602/1 and 602/2 (856.5 Sq. Yds. & Sq. ft) Cosy Nook Estate, Shimla". The sale price was adjusted from the claims assessed in favour of Sardar Santokh Singh and sum (sic-some) amount was paid in cash.

4. A formal sale certificate (Annexure-P1) was issued to the purchaser on October 31, 1961 with a copy to Regional Settlement Commissioner, Patiala, Sub Registrar, Shimla Municipal Committee, Shimla.

5. Adjoining property No. 219/4 known as "Fountain Bleaue Villa" Shimla was sold to Shri Kishore Chand Bhandari on September 30, 1958 with the following boundaries: North: Fountain Bleaue Cottage. South: Local Property. East: Fountain Bleaue Hotel. West: Other house.

6. This property was inherited by his-sons S/Shri Lt. Col. V.K. Bhandari, Davinder Kumar Bhandari, Bhupinder Kumar Bhandari and Narinder Kumar Bhandari. They sold this property to respondent No.5 in the year 1978 by two sale deeds (Annexures P7 & P8).

7. On July 16, 1966, Cosy Nook Estate was inspected, at the instance of Sardar Santosh Singh, Purchaser of Cosy Nook Estate, by the Managing Officer (Sales). On the basis of some report of the Patwari and the Municipal Engineer the Managing Officer found that Khasra Number 600-B, on which the water tanks were located at that time, was also part of Cosy Nook Estate even though the sale certificate did not mention this khasra number to be part of Cosy Nook Estate. Based on this report, a corrigendum was issued in the Sale Certificate in favour of Sardar Santokh Singh which included Khasra Number 600-B in addition to other khasra Numbers purchased by Sardar Santosh Singh.

8. It appears a dispute regarding Khasra Number 600-B arose between Shanti Devi, successor-in-interest of Santos Singh and owners of "Fountain Bleaue", namely, Gopal Mohan and others. The dispute ultimately landed up in this Court in Regular Second Appeal No.418 of 1990 and this Court by a judgment dated October 7,1994 held that Khasra Number 600-B comprising veranda and stairs-case is no part of Cosy Nook Estate. This Court took a view that after the issuance of the sale certificate of the property sold in public auction, the Officer/Authority under the Act became functus officio as the property ceases to be evacuee property and, therefore, no corrigendum could have been issued in the sale certificate issued to Sardar Santosh Singh including therein khasra Number 600-B. As a result, ownership of Sardar Santosh Singh, predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner, was confined to the property as included in the sale certificate Annexure-P1. Grievance of the petitioner.

9. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5 Enakshi Mahajan

















































































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 Back to top