Allowed

Amar Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Nov 2008LPA/252/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal arose from a dismissed writ petition regarding land ownership. The court disposed of the appeal by approving a settlement between the parties. The appellants must vacate the property and give up claims in exchange for a deposit of Rs. 6.50 lacs by the respondent, with possession to follow within two months.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of on terms of settlement; appellants to vacate property within two months upon respondent depositing Rs. 6.50 lacs.

Amar Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.

¶2

**LPA No. 252 of 2008 *****

¶3

Amar Kaur and others Verus State of Punjab and others.

¶4

¶5

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh.

¶6

¶7

Present: Shri Arun Jain, Sr. Advocate, with Shri Amit Jain, Advocate, for the appellants.

¶8

Shri A.K.Chopra, Sr. Advocate, with Shri Harminder Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶9

¶10

T.S.Thakur, Chief Justice (Oral)

¶11

This appeal arises out of an order dated 20.08.2008 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby writ petition No. 8948 of 1987 filed by the appellants challenging the orders passed by the Chief Settlement Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner, has been dismissed. It is in our opinion un-necessary to state in detail the back-drop in which the parties got engaged in a long drawn litigation between themselves. Suffice it to say that the dispute between the parties relates to ownership and possession of a parcel of land measuring 5 Marlas (124 square yards) situate in Village Tikhowal Mukerian, District Hoshiarpur, in the State of Punjab. While respondent No.3 claims to have purchased the said plot in a public auction on 30.06.1982 for a valuable consideration of Rs. 37,200/-, the appellants who happens to be the L.Rs of late Shri Hazara Singh, challenged the said sale and sought conferment of ownership rights upon them in pursuance to a government policy under which an occupant could claim such rights on payment of amount prescribed for the purpose. The Chief Settlement Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner while rejecting the said claim declared the purchase of the property by respondent No.3 to be valid

¶12

-2LPA No. 252 of 2008

¶13

and the respondent entitled to possession of the same. The said orders when assailed before the learned Single Judge in the writ petition, were confirmed. The present appeal was filed to assail the correctness of the said order.

¶14

When this appeal came up for hearing before us on 4.11.2008 and was argued at some length, learned counsel for the parties submitted that the parties were agreeable to exploring the possibility of an amicable settlement. The matter was therefore adjourned to enable them to do the needful. Learned counsel for the parties submit that a settlement has been arrived at between the parties on the following terms:-

¶15

i) The appellants shall give up all their rights, claims and interest what-so-ever including the challenge to the orders passed by the authorities below, in consideration of a sum of Rs. 6.50 lacs (Rs. 6,50,000/-) to be paid by respondent No.3 to them and vacate the premises in their possession, within a period of two months from the date the said amount is deposited by respondent No.3 in this Court and hand over the possession thereof to respondent No.3.

¶16

ii) Fifty percent (50%) of the amount so deposited shall be released in favour of appellant No.1, Smt. Amar Kaur, who happens to be mother of the remaining appellants, upon the appellants filing undertakings in the form of individual affidavits before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court to the effect that they shall without demur hand-over the vacant possession of the property in favour of respondent No.3 within the period stipulated above i.e. two months from the date the amount of Rs. 6.50 lacs (6,50,000/-) is deposited by respondent No.3 in this Court. The balance 50% shall, however, be released in favour of appellant No.1 only after the actual possession of the property has been delivered by the appellants to respondent No.3. (iii) The appellants shall be entitled to remove the malba of the super structures standing on the land in question, subject to the condition that in case the said removal of

¶17

-3-

¶18

does not take place within the period of two months from the date of payment of Rs. 6.50 lacs, deposited in this Court, the right to remove the malba shall stand forfeited and the malba shall stand vested in respondent No.3. (iv) In the event of any default on the part of the appellants in vacating the premises in their occupation as agreed to and indicated above, respondent No.3 shall be entitled to seek enforcement of this order in appropriate proceedings before this Court including proceedings in the exercise of its contempt jurisdiction.

¶19

Mr. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the present appeal could be disposed of on the agreed terms indicated above.

¶20

Mr. Chopra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 is also agreeable to the disposal of the appeal on the agreed terms enumerated above. The terms agreed between the parties are even in our opinion lawful. We, therefore, see no reason why the appeal should not be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties. We accordingly dispose of this appeal on the terms set out in the body of this order and direct that the parties shall faithfully adhere to the said terms and be entitled to seek redress against each other in case of any violation. Intimation regarding making of the deposit by respondent No.3 shall be given to counsel for the appellants which shall be deemed to be a sufficient for the purpose of start of the period stipulated for vacation of the possession of the property in dispute. No costs.

¶21

(T.S.Thakur) Chief Justice

¶22

(Jasbir Singh) Judge

¶23

November 06, 2008. Malik

Amar Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Partap Bagh Welfare Society Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Kulbir Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Iqbal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Joint Action Forum Against Atrocities Vs State of Hry. and Ors.

Faquir Chand & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.