IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, SANJIV BERRY, JJ.
Kandhari Beverages Pvt. Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
CWP NO. 26121 of 2019
Decided On : 20-03-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. timeline of land allotment process (Para 2 , 3 , 6) |
| 2. litigation affecting land possession (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. respondents' justification for land allotment position (Para 7 , 8 , 12) |
| 4. court's assessment of agreement and compliance (Para 10 , 15) |
| 5. petitioner's unsuccessful requests and changing stance (Para 11 , 14) |
| 6. legal basis for allotment cancellation and rates (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. final conclusion on petition merit and dismissal (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Sanjiv Berry, J.
Present Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to hand over the possession of additional allotted land measuring 11.40 acres, adjacent to the existing industrial plot of the petitioner at the original allotment price.
2. The case put forth by the petitioner is that the petitioner company had applied for allotment of industrial plot measuring 30 acres in May-June 2009 for setting up a Bottling Plant at IGC, Saha, District Ambala, Haryana. Vide letter dated 22.07.2009, an industrial plot measuring 20 acres was allotted to the petitioner company out of which 13.40 acres was allotted at tentative rate of Rs. 1100 per sq. metre being the proposed rate for the year 2009-10 and respondent No.2 further assured that the allotment of remaining land measuring 6.60 acres to the petitioner as and when the same is got available for allotment vide letter Annexure P-2. Thereafter, Regular Letter of Allotment (RLA) Annexure P-3 was issued in this regard on 19.08.2009. The possession of 13.40 acres of land was taken over by petitioner company on 13.04.2010 bearing Plot No. 460 Sector 2 HSIIDC, Saha, District Ambala, vide Possession Certificate Annexure P-4.
3. Since, the petitioner company required a larger plot for commencement of the project, it requested, vide Annexure P-5 dated 10.05.2010, to respondent No.2 to allot the remaining area of 6.60 acres in addition there to another 12.60 acres which was available adjacent to the plot where the petitioner had set up part of his Bottling Plant. Considering the request, respondent No.2 allotted additional land measuring 11.40 acres to the petitioner, adjacent to the aforesaid existing plot on 22.03.2011 vide Annexure P-6, thereby intimating the petitioner that this additional plot has been merged in the existing plot and the total area of the plot is 24.8 acres. This additional land was allotted @ Rs. 2500/- per sq. metre and the petitioner was advised to furnish the bank draft which was deposited on 08.07.2011 vide Annexure P-7 with the respondent No.2. As per request, Agreement and Acceptance of RLA for additional allotted land of 11.40 acres was submitted by the petitioner vide letter dated 18.07.2011, Annexure P-8, but despite that respondent No.2 failed to hand over the possession of this additional land to the petitioner till 22.09.2011 when the first installment fell due and petitioner deposited the same on 22.09.2011. Petitioner wrote letter dated 23.02.2012, Annexure P-9 asking respondent No.2 to handover physical possession of additional allotted land.
4. On 05.03.2012 petitioner came to know that major part of the additional land was subject matter of stay order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court and some part was yet to be acquired so the petitioner wrote letter Annexure P-10 dated 05.03.2012 requesting the HSIIDC to defer the balance installments and also not to charge any interest there on until the possession is handed over. The factum of stay order and that most of the land was under litigation was admitted by respondent No.2 vide letter dated 19.03.2012, Annexure P-11 wherein, it was, however mentioned that some of the land was free and petitioner was asked to submit request for physical possession in the Standard Performa. In view of the response by respondent No.2 the petitioner took impression that his request for deferment of installment has been exceeded too and accordingly he di
The court emphasized that failure to comply with payment directives, as mandated by public notice, results in cancellation of allotment, and timely action to enforce rights is critically important.
Petitioners cannot assert rights for land allotments when their claims are contingent on another party's pending applications, especially after such approvals have expired.
Non-compliance with payment schedules in allotment agreements leads to automatic cancellation of rights to the property.
Conditions for land allotment under rehabilitation laws must be reasonable and not arbitrary, especially when they affect the fundamental rights of displaced persons.
A concluded contract requires mutual agreement on essential terms, including payment and delivery, without which claims to the land become unenforceable.
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.