IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

209 Date of Decision : 02.02.2026 Suresh Kumar Mehta and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (2) CWP-3718-2022 Inderjeet Kaur Chhabra and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (3) CWP-4410-2022 (O&M)

Suman Lata Kuthiala and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents (4) CWP-15136-2022 Suman Patial and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI ----

Present: Mr. Kamal Sehgal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Charanji Lal, Advocate and Mr. Ravinder Pankaj, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Tarushi Monga, Advocate for Mr. Tejeshwar Singh, Advocate for the petitioners (in CWP-3718-2022).

Mr. Yatin Bunger, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

Mr. Shekhar Verma, Advocate Mr. Jagraj Singh, Advocate for respondent No.4 (in CWP-18446-2021 and CWPs No.3718 and 4410 of 2022).

Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate Mr. Saksham Khunger, Advocate for respondent No.6 (in CWP-18446-2021).

****

Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. (Oral)

1. All the petitions, the details of which are mentioned in the heading, involve common point of law and common set of facts, hence, they are being dealt together. For the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from CWP No.18446 of 2021.

2. In the present petition, the challenge which has been made is to the validity of byelaw No.3.18 of Punjab Municipal Building Bye-Laws, 2018, (for short, ‘the 2018 byelaws’), as amended in the year 2019.

3. The contention which has been raised by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that byelaw 3.18 provides for grant of completion certificate/benefit of sale completion, which grant of benefit cannot be allowed keeping in view the fact that till the building qua which such certificate is sought, is complete in all respects, the completion certificate cannot be granted. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners argues that once, there is no provision for grant of such certificate qua partial completion of building concerned envisaged under the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911, (for short, ‘the 1911 Act’), the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, (for short, ‘the 1976 Act’) or even in the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995 (for short, ‘the 1995 Act’), the benefit of completion certificate qua a partially completed building which has been granted under the byelaws, is contrary to provisions of the parent statutes mentioned hereinbefore.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the present matter is a commercial dispute between the parties as, the builder, i.e. the promoter, has raised a colony and as per the agreement entered into between the parties, till the completion of the offer made to the petitioner qua the building/construction, the petitioners were entitled to certain financial benefits, which financial benefits come to a halt when all the required terms and conditions of the agreement entered into between the parties qua the commercial building are fulfilled, even if the whole construction of the commercial building is not complete. However, in order to gain more financial benefits, which come to a halt on fulfilment of terms between the parties, challenge has been laid down to byelaw 3.18 of the 2018 byelaws.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent further submits that on the date when the agreement was entered into between the petitioners and the builder, i.e. respondent No.6, the said byelaws duly existed and it is only upon fulfilment of the terms and conditions agreed upon between the parties, that the possession of respective units of the commercial building was handed over to the petitioners, who still want financial benefits which they were receiving before the possession of building units was delivered to them, by raising a plea that the entire building is not complet