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

2015 Supreme(P&H) 466

HEMANT GUPTA, HARI PAL VERMA
Gurdial Singh Sidhu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellant :G.S. Randhawa, Advocate
For the Respondents:Vivek Chauhan, Advocate

Hari Pal Verma, J.

1. Through the instant writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of order of resumption dated 31.11.1993 (Annexure P1) in respect of site/Kothi No. 41, Sector 2-A, Chandigarh along with forfeiture of 10% of the total amount of premium. Challenge has also been laid to order dated 31.8.1995 (Annexure P2) and order dated 22.11.2000 (Annexure P6), whereby the appeal and revision petition, respectively, filed by the petitioners, have been dismissed. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Sube Singh Sidhu was the owner in possession of plot/kothi No. 41, Sector 2A, Chandigarh by virtue of allotment letter dated 13.2.1951. After the allotment, said Sube Singh raised construction over the plot and started residing therein. As the city of Chandigarh was developing and there was no proper and adequate accommodation for the offices of the State of Punjab and the Union of India, the owners let out their houses for the purposes of offices, which was in the knowledge of the respondents and no proceedings were initiated under Section 8-A of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952











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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top