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

2019 Supreme(UK) 86

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Lok Pal Singh, J.
Chandra Singh – Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand & others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1936 of 2018 (M/S)
Decided On : 20-02-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Yogesh Pande, Addl. C.S.C., Mr. Siddhartha Jain, Advocate, Mr. Naman Kamboj, Advocate

Headnote:

Writ Jurisdiction – Writ Court cannot declare the rights of the parties over the property in dispute – It cannot declare a party as owner of the property like a revenue court. (Paras 14 to 18)

fjV vf/kdkfjrk & fjV U;k;ky; }kjk jktLo U;k;ky; ds rkSj ij i{kdkj dks laifÙk dk Lokeh ?kksf"kr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA ¼izLrj 14 ls 18½

JUDGMENT :

Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents not to recover any amount from the land of the petitioner, bearing khasra nos. 260, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 273, situated in Village Raini Chak Subhai, Tehsil Joshimath, District Chamoli.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Tribe community and he was the recorded owner of land bearing khasra nos. 260, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 273, situated in Village Raini Chak Subhai, Tehsil Joshimath, District Chamoli. The petitioner and fifth respondent M/s Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. entered into an agreement to sell on 16.09.2006 by which it has been decided that the petitioner will provide the land to the fifth respondent on payment of Rs.90,000/- per Nali and a total land measuring area 7 Nali 11 Muthi was decided to be sold for a consideration of Rs.7,14,375/-. Out of said amount the petitioner received Rs.1,85,000/- in advance and the remaining balance of Rs.5,29,375/-. Fifth respondent undertook that the sale deed will be executed after payment of the remaining amount. Copy of the agreement to sell is annexed with the writ petition which depicts that the possession has been handed over to the fifth respondent for raising construction of power project. The petitioner has annexed a copy of agreement to sell executed by him in favour of fifth respondent. A perusal of the contents of agreement to sell would reveal that the petitioner himself has permitted the fifth respondent to raise construction over the land in dispute, meaning thereby that petitioner himself has handed over the possession to the fifth respondent after taking 1/4th sale consideration.

3. It is alleged in the writ petition that fifth respondent never paid the remaining amount of the petitioner and started the construction of project and the same has not been completed till date. It is also alleged that on the basis of said agreement fifth respondent took loan of rupees 45 crores from the Punjab National Bank, Branch Industrial Area, Ludhiana, Punjab. On 20.03.2016, all the villagers made application to the Director of fifth respondent for payment of balance amount and for compensation. On 08.07.2016, the petitioner made application to the District Magistrate, Chamoli in the Samadhan portal. The office of the District Magistrate, Chamoli forwarded the letter to the Tehsildar Joshimath and the Managing Director of fifth respondent for necessary action. On 01.05.2018, the petitioner and other villagers have made application to Mr. Nipon Bansal, Resolution Professional in the matter of Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. stating therein that the agreement to sell was never executed and the balance amount has not been paid and on the basis of rough agreement M/s Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. is trying to grab the land of the petitioner and since the National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh has appointed him for regulation or the liquidation since the land is not being sold to the company, therefore, the petitioner will deprive of his land. The company has used the land without payment of rent, therefore, the objection may be accepted and the Corporation be directed not to create any third party interest or execute any sale deed.

4. It is apt to mention here that a revenue case no. 36 of 2010-11, State vs Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. was filed and on 30.11.2017, the land of petitioner has been vested in the Government as the possession of the land in lieu of an agreement has been delivered to Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation by the petitioner in violation of the provisions of Section 167 of the U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act. On 14.05.2018, the petitioner made an application to Mr. Nipon Bansal Resolution Professional in the mater of M/s Rishi Ganga Hydro Power Corporation Ltd., stating therein that on the basis of the agreement to sell, the amount has not been


























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
whatsapp-icon Back to top