Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952

9 judgments · newest first · showing 1–9

CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATOR & ORS. & ETC. ETC.versusMANJIT KUMAR GULATI & ORS. & ETC. ETC.

[2024] 12 S.C.R. 947Appeal(s) allowed

The Chandigarh Administrator sold a 99‑year leasehold booth site to Manjit Kumar Gulati and others in 1989, requiring 25% premium upfront and the balance in three installments. The allottees failed to pay the remaining 75%, were served a show‑cause notice, given multiple opportunities to clear dues, …

ESTATE OFFICER AND ANR.versusCHARANJIT KAUR

2021 INSC 457Disposed off

The respondents, allottees of leasehold plots in Chandigarh, sought conversion of their sites to freehold by paying the conversion fee fixed under the 1996 Rules. The District Consumer Forum, State and National Consumer Commissions ordered the Estate Officer to convert the plots, treating the fee as …

TILAK RAJ BAKSHIversusAVINASH CHAND SHARMA (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & OTHERS

2019 INSC 923Dismissed

The plaintiff, Tilak Raj Bakshi, claimed that his brother (the first defendant) violated a family settlement by selling his one‑third share of a Chandigarh house to a stranger (the second defendant) without obtaining the written concurrence of the other brothers and without offering the share to the …

CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARDversusAVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 636Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by the Chandigarh Housing Board challenging orders of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission which directed the Board to refund earnest money and interest to members of co‑operative housing societies. The Court held that the society members are the …

HIRA TIKKOOversusUNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH AND ORS.

2004 INSC 267Disposed off

The case concerned the allotment of industrial plots in Chandigarh under the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 and the 1973 Lease‑Hold Rules. Of 339 shortlisted allottees, 254 could not be given possession because much of the land was declared a reserved forest and fell within …

M/S. TERI OAT ESTATES (P) LTD.versusU.T. CHANDIGARH AND ORS.

2003 INSC 746Disposed off

The appellant, M/s. Teri Oat Estates, purchased a lease‑hold site in Chandigarh and constructed a six‑storey building but failed to pay the instalments and ground rent on time, leading the Estate Officer to invoke Section 8‑A of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 and cancel …

M/S STYLE (DRESS LAND) ETC. ETC.versusUNION TERRITORY,CHANDIGARH AND ANR.

1999 INSC 341Case Partly allowed

The appellants, shop‑keepers leasing commercial premises in Chandigarh, challenged a steep increase in rent from Rs.2,671 to Rs.14,000 per month, arguing that the Union Territory lacked jurisdiction because the Central Government had not framed rules under the Capital of Punjab (Development and …