Bhagvant Kumar Singh Vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority and Another

Bhagvant Kumar Singh vs Haryana Urban Development Authority and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Mar 04, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1071200

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1071200
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Mar 04, 2013
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bhagvant Kumar Singh

Respondent

Haryana Urban Development Authority and Another

Excerpt

.....by that date. c.w.p.no.10690 of 2012 -2- after 5 years.on 20.1.2006 the petitioner received a letter (annexure p-7)from the respondent offering possession of the said plot which was inadvertently issued. in response to the said letter, the petitioner tendered 15% amount by a draft (vide annexure p-8).the respondents returned the said draft vide letter dated 24.2.2006 anneuxre p-11 stating therein that the said letter was issued inadvertently and the same has been withdrawn. thereafter the allotment of plot was cancelled by the e.o.huda vide letter dated 16.3.2006 (annexure p-12) due to non-deposit of remaining 15% of the aforesaid amount. not in the year 2012, the present petition has been filed challenging the order of cancellation of the allotment. learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the policy dated 20.3.2007, for condoning the delay in depositing 15% of the amount in case of residential, commercial, institutional and industrial sites beyond stipulated period of 90 days argued that the chairman has the power to extend the said period with additional surcharge at the rate of 10%, therefore,he prays that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to move necessary application for extension of c.w.p.no.10690 of 2012 -3- time before the concerned authority, if permissible under the law. counsel for the respondents has no objection. dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. ( satish kumar mittal) judge 04 03.2013 ( amol rattan singh ) reema judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.10690 of 2012 Date of Decision:- 04.03.2013.

Bhagvant Kumar Singh .....Petitioner Versus Haryana Urban Development Authority and another .....Respondents CORAM :- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr.Aman Pal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms.Neena Madan, Advocate for the respondents.

**** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.

(Oral) In the year 2000, the petitioner had applied for 250 square yards residential plot in Sector-64, Faridabad, under General category alongwith requisite 10% earnest money.

In the draw of lot held on 20.9.2000 the petitioner was allotted plot No.695 Sector 64, Faridabad.

According to the offer of allotment dated 11.1.2001 (Annexure P-2) given to the petitioner he was required to deposit 15% amount within 30 days.

Undisputedly the petitioner did not deposit 15% amount in terms of said letter of offer within 30 days, which was due to expire on 10.2.2001.

However, before that date the petitioner moved an application on 8.2.2001 for extension of 60 days time for depositing the said amount (Annexure P-3).The said application was allowed vide letter dated 14.3.2013 Annexure P-4 and the petitioner was permitted to deposit 15% amount upto 10.4.2001.

Undisputedly the petitioner did not deposit the said amount by that date.

C.W.P.No.10690 of 2012 -2- After 5 yeaRs.on 20.1.2006 the petitioner received a letter (Annexure P-7)from the respondent offering possession of the said plot which was inadvertently issued.

In response to the said letter, the petitioner tendered 15% amount by a draft (vide Annexure P-8).The respondents returned the said draft vide letter dated 24.2.2006 Anneuxre P-11 stating therein that the said letter was issued inadvertently and the same has been withdrawn.

Thereafter the allotment of plot was cancelled by the E.O.HUDA vide letter dated 16.3.2006 (Annexure P-12) due to non-deposit of remaining 15% of the aforesaid amount.

not in the year 2012, the present petition has been filed challenging the order of cancellation of the allotment.

Learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the policy dated 20.3.2007, for condoning the delay in depositing 15% of the amount in case of residential, commercial, institutional and Industrial sites beyond stipulated period of 90 days argued that the Chairman has the power to extend the said period with additional surcharge at the rate of 10%, therefore,he prays that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to move necessary application for extension of C.W.P.No.10690 of 2012 -3- time before the concerned authority, if permissible under the law.

Counsel for the respondents has no objection.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE 04 03.2013 ( AMOL RATTAN SINGH ) reema JUDGE

Same Court & Year Punjab and Haryana · 2013 Same Parties Bhagvant Kumar Singh vs Haryana Urban Development Authority a... Same Subject Land Acquisition