V. N. KHARE, S. B. SINHA
Teri Oat Estates (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
U. T. Chandigarh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, J -These appeals involving common questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The short question which arises for consideration in these appeals centres round the power of resumption of land/building of the first respondent in favour of the appellants under the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 read with the Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Buildings Rules, 1973 and the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.
BACKGROUND FACT :
2. The factual matrix of the matter is being noticed from Civil Appeal No. 49 of 1999. The site bearing No. SCO 126-127, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh was purchased on lease-hold basis by the appellant in open auction held on 13.3.1988. The purchase amount was to be paid in lump sum and/or in four yearly instalments. In the event of the purchaser opting for payment in instalments, 7 interest was payable. It is not in dispute that 25 of the allotment price was required to be deposited within 30 days of auction and upon compliance of the said term, the Estate Officer, Chandigarh, confirmed the lease of the said site in favour of the
M/s Darkadas Marfatia and Sons v. Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
Babu Singh Bains & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Jasbir Kaur v. U.T. Chandigarh
Roochira Ceramics v. HUDA & Ors.
Kashmir Chand v. State of Haryana
Surinder Kaur v. Government of Punjab & Ors.
S.M.S. Sandhu Builders v. Chandigarh Administration
Patiala Inds. Investment Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Anr.
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.