Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
State of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Hem Raj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of land ownership and usage dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. appellants argue undue consideration in judgments. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 3. significance of due process in property dispossession. (Para 11 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. title and rights of property owners. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, dated 22.05.2025 as passed by the learned District Judge-I, Mandi, District Mandi, HP in Civil Appeal No. 13 of 2025, whereby the appeal preferred by the present appellants/ defendants has been ordered to be dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 26.03.2024, as passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., passed in Civil Suit No. 82 of 2020, have been affirmed, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff/respondent for declaration and mandatory injunction was decreed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff/ respondent filed a suit for mandatory injunction in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Mandi, HP on 26.03.2024 on the ground that the land comprised in Khewat Khatauni No. 45 min/ 49, Khasra No. 1123 measuring 00-04-05 bigha situ
State cannot deprive individuals of property without due process and must provide just compensation if property is utilized for public use.
Welfare State cannot deprive property without due process and compensation under Article 300A; adverse possession unavailable to State; delay/laches no bar to suit for continuing deprivation of prope....
The right to property is a constitutional right that cannot be taken without due process of law, and plaintiffs are entitled to compensation for land used by the State for public purposes.
State cannot utilize private land for roads without due process and compensation; unsubstantiated oral consent rejected; welfare state barred from adverse possession; concurrent findings upheld absen....
State must compensate citizens for property utilized for public projects under due process. Delay in claiming rights does not preclude entitlement if injustice persists.
State cannot deprive citizen of property for public use without due process and compensation under Article 300A; welfare state barred from adverse possession claim; delay/laches inapplicable to conti....
State cannot deprive property owner of land for public road without due process of acquisition and compensation under Article 300A; defenses of delay, acquiescence, estoppel, and adverse possession r....
State cannot dispossess individuals of property or utilize land for public purpose without legal acquisition and just compensation, reinforcing constitutional property rights.
Welfare state cannot deprive property without due process and compensation for public use like road construction; adverse possession, delay, laches, estoppel unavailable despite long delay as continu....
Welfare State cannot deprive property without due process and compensation under Article 300A; cannot plead adverse possession or delay against owners seeking payment for land used in public road con....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
