Allowed

Surinder Singh Gill and Another v. H.U.D.A. and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC27 Jan 2012CWP/14867/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a constitutional writ petition, the petitioners sought a mandate directing the HUDA to transfer title of two allotted plots based on an execution of a civil court decree. The court directed the execution of the conveyance deed by the respondents upon deposit of the requisite stamp duty and additional stamp duty for transfer, addressing the issue of missing registered deeds from original allotte

What did the court decide?

The respondents were directed to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the petitioners on deposit of the requisite stamp duty and additional stamp duty payable for transfer.

Surinder Singh Gill and Another Vs H.U.D.A. and… — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP No. 14867 of 2009

¶3

Date of decision: 27.1.2012

¶4

Surinder Singh Gill and another

¶5

…..Petitioners

¶6

vs.

¶7

Haryana Urban Development Authority and another

¶8

.......Respondents

¶9

CORAM: -HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

¶10

Present: - Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Ajay Kumar Kansal, Advocate for respondents.

¶12

HEMANT GUPTA, J

¶13

Petitioners claim a writ of mandamus for directing the respondents to transfer SCO Nos 178 and 179 situated at Urban Commercial Estate-I, Hisar in their names.

¶14

SCO No. 178 was allotted to one Subhash Ahuja on 2.8.1984 whereas SCO No. 179 was allotted to Indu Ahuja w/o Subhash Ahuja on the same date. The said allottees have raised construction on the said plots which is evident by the fact that the water collection was released on 31.12.1987 and electric connection sanctioned on 21.1.1988. The occupation certificate was also granted on 31.7.1990. No objection certificate was also issued on 25.3.1991 to the original allottees for transfer of the plots.

¶15

CWP No. 14867 of 2009

¶16

-2-

¶17

Thereafter on 1.6.1991, petitioners entered into an agreement for purchase of the said shop-cum-office. On the basis of the said agreement, petitioners obtained a civil Court decree dated 23.4.1994. Petitioners sought to seek transfer of the title on the basis of civil Court decree which was not effected and consequently, petitioners invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court.

¶18

On behalf of respondents, the stand is that it is not a case of transfer of a plot, wherein no building has been constructed and the total sale consideration not paid to HUDA. It is a case of complete transfer of title in the plot with the superstructure. Therefore, such transfer could be effected only by virtue of registered conveyance deed. In the absence of conveyance deed, in favour of original allottees, the civil Court decree cannot be given effect to by the respondents.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the whereabouts of the original allottees are not known. There is civil Court decree in favour of the petitioners which has not been disputed since 1994. Therefore, the title of the petitioners is not disputed but it is only the question of payment of stamp duty in respect of execution of the conveyance deed and/or sale deed in favour of the petitioners. Petitioners are ready and willing to deposit the stamp duty so as to effectuate the execution of the title deeds in favour of the petitioners.

¶20

CWP No. 14867 of 2009

¶21

-2-

¶22

In view of the said fact, we direct the execution of the conveyance deed by respondents in favour of the petitioners on deposit of the requisite stamp duty on the conveyance deed as also the additional stamp duty payable for transfer of the rights of the allottees in favour of the petitioners on the same documents in the peculiar facts of the present case.

¶23

Disposed of in the above terms.

¶24

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

¶25

(A.N.JINDAL) JUDGE

¶26

27.1.2012 preeti

Surinder Singh Gill and Another v. H.U.D.A. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surinder Singh Gill and Another v. H.U.D.A. and Another

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

Kaur Chand Vs Chief Comissioner

Parkash Lal Vs HUDA and Anr.

Sukhraj Singh and Ors. Vs Chd. Housing Board and Anr.

Inder Singh Vs U.T.Chandigarh.

Raj Kumar Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Joginder Singh Jangu Vs HUDA & Ors.