Disposed

Davinder Singh v. Chandigarh Administration through the Advisor to Administrator Union Territory Chandigarh Others

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Jan 2023CWP/11589/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging orders concerning property possession and maintenance, the petitioner and respondent reached a voluntary settlement after filing the petition. The Court recorded the compromise deed where the higher orders were declared nullified and possession rights were to be governed as per the agreement. The Court set aside the impugned orders and disposed of the petition rel

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; petition disposed of; parties to be governed by terms of compromise deed.

Davinder Singh Vs Chandigarh Administration… — Maintenance and Alimony | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

201 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CWP-11589-2019 (O&M) Date of decision : 18.01.2023

¶3

Davinder Singh ...Petitioner

¶4

Vs.

¶5

Chandigarh Administration through The Advisor To Administrator Union Territory Chandigarh and others

¶6

...Respondents

¶7

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ BAJAJ

¶8

Present: Mr. O. P. Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Parul Aggarwal, Advocate for the applicant-petitioner.

¶9

Mr. L.S. Virk, Advocate, for respondents No.1 to 3.

¶10

Mr. Yashpal Thakur, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav Arora, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

¶11

¶12

MANOJ BAJAJ, J.

¶13

Petitioner-Davinder Singh has filed this writ petition under Article 226 Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure P-11) passed by respondent No.3-The District Magistrate-cum-Appellate Authority, thereby affirming the order dated 10.1.2019 (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No.2-Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum-Maintenance Tribunal, Chandigarh, whereby petitioner has been directed to hand over

¶14

GEETA RANI 2023.02.22 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶15

CWP-11589-2019 (O&M)

¶16

¶17

possession of the first floor of House No.1703, Sector 34, Chandigarh, to respondent No.4.

¶18

Today, learned senior counsel for the petitioner has produced the copy of the compromise deed dated 17.01.2023 and states that during the pendency of this petition, respondent No.4-Inder Singh (father) and Davinder Singh (son) have voluntarily entered into a settlement. The relevant terms of Compromise Deed read as under:-

¶19

“1. That the First Party shall stay on the ground floor with the elder son in a well furnished accommodation since he is not able to go upstairs because of his old age and pain in the knees.

¶20

2. That the First Party has also agreed not to receive any maintenance amount of Rs. 10,000 w.e.f. Feburary, 2023 and also return Rs. 4,34,697/- to the Second Party for the maintenance, well-being and education of the family and the Children of the Second Party.

¶21

3. That the Second Party shall serve his father with devotion and dedication in his old age without giving any grievance on any account whatsoever to the First Party.

¶22

4. That it is also agreed between the First and the Second Party that the order dated 10-01-19 passed by Additional Deputy Commissioner cum Maintenance Tribunal and the order dated 14-03-19 passed by District Magistrate cum Appellate Authority may be considered to be nullified by this compromise between the parties and the application filed by the First Party before the Additional Deputy Commissioner cum Maintenance Tribunal may be considered to be withdrawn by the First Party.

¶23

5. That the Second Party undertakes to have the petition dismissed as withdrawn and the petition has thus become infructuous. This Hon 'ble Court may kindly dismiss the petition as withdrawn.”

¶24

The above compromise is taken on record.

¶25

The petitioner and respondent No.4 are present in the Court

¶26

GEETA RANI 2023.02.22 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶27

CWP-11589-2019 (O&M)

¶28

¶29

and their separate statements have been recorded, wherein they have admitted the compromise.

¶30

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that as per settlement arrived at between the parties, the present petition be disposed of.

¶31

The prayer is not opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶32

In view of the above, the impugned orders are set aside and it is directed that the respective possessory rights of the parties in the property in question shall be governed as per the terms and conditions of the compromise.

¶33

The petition is disposed of.

¶34

(MANOJ BAJAJ) JUDGE

¶35

18.01.2023

¶36

geeta

¶37

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No

¶38

GEETA RANI 2023.02.22 18:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Davinder Singh v. Chandigarh Administration through the Advisor to Administrator Union Territory Chandigarh Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Davinder Singh v. Chandigarh Administration through the Advisor to Administrator Union Territory Chandigarh Others

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

Dcm Eng. Prod. Vs Rishu Kumar and Another

Suman Lata and Another Vs Deputy Commissioner, Fatehabad

Bhag Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Surjit Singh Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh and Ors.

Harbans Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Ankur Singh Kang Vs Vice Chancellor and Ors.