Dismissed
Joginder Kaur v. Ludhiana Improvement Trust and Ors.
Punjab & Haryana HCCWP/7960/1999
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 1999 (O & M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
What the court decided
AI extract
of 1999 (O & M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
::1::
CWP No.7960 of 1999 (O & M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.7960 of 1999 (O & M) Date of Decision: July 08, 2013
Joginder Kaur
....Petitioner
Versus
The Ludhiana Improvement Trust and another
.... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH
Present: None for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Khunger, Advocate, for the respondents.
****
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in view of Para 2 of the preliminary objections of the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, there is no merit in the writ petition as the petitioner was not successful in the draw of plots held on 10th January, 1985 where her application was considered at Sr. No.1152. He further submitted that the petitioner was required to give an option for including her name in the next draw of plots which had not been done. Para 2 of the preliminary objections reads thus:-
“ That after the deposit of the earnest money by the petitioner, the name of the petitioner was considered in the draw for the allotment of plots held on 10.1.1985 at Sr. No.1152. However, she was not successful in the said draw. Thereafter, no draw of 200 Sq. Yards plots have been held by the answering respondent. As and when any draw of plots is held and advertisement is given in the Newspapers to the effect that persons who remained unsuccessful in the earlier draw of plots can
::2::
CWP No.7960 of 1999 (O & M)
give option and on receipt of the option their names are included in the next draw of plots because 25% of the plots are reserved for those persons who had already applied for the allotment of plots in other schemes but were not successful in getting the plots. It was so stipulated in the advertisement Annexure P-1 as condition No.3. Therefore, there are two options with the person who remained unsuccessful in the draw of plots either to get refund of the earnest money or to give option for inclusion his/her name in the draw of plots to be held in future. However, in the case in hand, the petitioner remained unsuccessful in the draw of plots held on 10.01.1985. Thereafter vide her application Annexure P-9 she opted to have a refund of earnest money. Therefore, vide Annexure P-10 the earnest money was refunded to the petitioner.”
dismissed for want of prosecution.
(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
(JASPAL SINGH) JUDGE
July 08, 2013 sukhpreet
Joginder Kaur
The Ludhiana Improvement Trust
AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
JASPAL SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court