Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARSH BUNGER
S.S. Bhatia – Appellant
Versus
Jalandhar Improvement Trust – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harsh Bunger, J.
1. For convenience, parties herein are being addressed as per their status in the original suit.
2. This is the plaintiffs' second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 02.06.1989 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar; whereby, he reversed the judgment and decree dated 29.09.1986 passed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Jalandhar and dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs.
3. Briefly, the plaintiffs, who are the practicing lawyers in District Courts, Jalandhar, filed a suit for permanent injunction for restraining the defendant (Jalandhar Improvement Trust) from making alteration in its 55 Acres' Scheme by transferring/alienating, in any manner, whole or any part of the said land or the said scheme, except to demarcate the chambers allotted to the plaintiffs, who had paid the consideration in advance.
4. It is the pleaded case of the plaintiffs that the Bar Association, Jalandhar, on behalf of the plaintiffs and other lawyers, had represented to the Improvement Trust, Jalandhar that the District Courts had become congested and the lawyers had no respectable accommodation in or around the Court; therefore, a space be demarcated adjo
The court ruled that the Gorakhpur Improvement Trust was validly established and could operate, thus affirming the legality of the land acquisition proceedings under the concerned laws.
The court upheld that delays in issuing awards under land acquisition laws can be excused due to litigation, providing that all statutory provisions have been substantially followed.
The Divisional Commissioner had the power to examine and cancel the transfer of land, and the petitioner-Society had no legal right to claim allotment of land based on the Trust's decision.
Jurisdiction under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act is limited to clerical corrections and cannot adjudicate title disputes, which are reserved for Civil Courts.
The court affirmed that the approved layout plan of 2008 designates specific plots as residential, rejecting claims of their designation as park facilities.
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
