Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
ROMESH VERMA
State of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Piar Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and historical context of land (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defendants’ preliminary objections and contestations (Para 5 , 10) |
| 3. issuance and context of trial court judgment (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. pleadings and legal arguments in appeal (Para 9 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. constitutional rights regarding property and due process (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. dismissal of appeal and affirmation of lower court’s ruling (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
Romesh Verma, J.
The present Regular Second Appeal arises out of the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. dated 29.07.2024, whereby the appeal as preferred by the defendants/appellants has been ordered to be dismissed and the judgment and decree as passed by the learned Civil Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi, H.P. dated 31.10.2023 was affirmed
2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff- respondent filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief for injunction in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Sarkaghat, District Mandi on 18.05.2015. As per the averments as made in the plaint, the plaintiff is owner of the land comprised in Khewat No. 203 min, Khatoni No. 234
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....
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 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 utilize private land for roads without due process and compensation; unsubstantiated oral consent rejected; welfare state barred from adverse possession; concurrent findings upheld absen....
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....
State cannot deprive individuals of property without due process and must provide just compensation if property is utilized for public use.
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
