Back
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Roshan Lal – Appellant
Versus
Financial Commissioner Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' claim regarding plot resumption and payment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. discriminatory treatment alleged by petitioners. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of delay and appeal. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 16.01.2019 (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No.1 dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioners under Section 15(3) of the Punjab New Mandi Townships (Development & Regulation) Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), order dated 22.07.2016 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.2 dismissing the appeal and order dated 15.09.1998 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.3, vide which S.C.F. Plot No.6, situated in New Grain Market, Panni Wala Fatta (hereinafter referred to as 'the plot in dispute') was resumed and 10% of the consideration money was forfeited. The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to restore the allotment of the plot in dispute after receipt of the entire sale consideration alongwith interest and thereafter to execute the sale deed/conveyance deed in favour of the petitioners.
2. The petitioners, who are real bro
Resumption of property must be justified with clear reasoning and due process; it should be a last resort after all recovery efforts fail.
The court established that procedural errors and good faith efforts to fulfill conditions can mitigate penalties in industrial allotment cases.
The binding nature of contract terms and conditions, and the voluntary acceptance of the contract by the petitioner.
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
