IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
Principal Secretary Revenue to the Govt. of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Sant Ram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ROMESH VERMA, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and decree, dated 08.07.2024 as passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. in Civil Appeal No. 32/13 of 2023, whereby the appeal preferred by the present appellants/defendants has been ordered to be dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 15.05.2023, as passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Bilaspur, H.P. in Civil Suit No. 741 of 2015, titled as Sant Ram & others vs. The Principal Secretary, Revenue & others, have been affirmed, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs/respondents for declaration and mandatory injunction was decreed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiffs/respondents filed a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Bilaspur, on 27.05.2015 on the ground that the land comprised in Khata/Khatoni No. 21/21, Khasra No. 162, measuring 512 bighas, situated at Village Tramari, Pargna Rattanpur, Tehsil Sadar, District Bilaspur, H.P. is owned and possessed by the plaintiffs. In the year 1980, the defendants had constructed DeothLag Ghat Jamli link road and for that purpose, the land owned and possessed by the plaintiffs
Vidya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others
Sukh Dutt Ratra and another vs. State of H.P. and others
State must compensate citizens for property utilized for public projects under due process. Delay in claiming rights does not preclude entitlement if injustice persists.
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.
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....
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 individuals of property without due process and must provide just compensation if property is utilized for public use.
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 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....
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....
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....
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.