← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/22850/2018dismissed

Baljit Singh v. Permanent Lok Adalat And ORS

2018-09-28Mr. Justice Amit Rawal2 pages

CWP No.22850 of 2018 [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.22850 of 2018 Date of decision:September 28 , 2018 Baljit Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Permanent Lok Adalat and others

...Respondents

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. A.S.Syan, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

The petitioner has challenged the order of the Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Fatehgarh Sahib (hereinafter referred to as the "Lok Adalat") dated 24.05.2018, by which his application filed under Section 22-C of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, has been dismissed. In brief, the petitioner took part in the bid of shop of Ashok Kumar S/o Jai Karan Dass which was mortgaged with M/s Ram Chand Faqir Chand. He offered the bid of `22,50,000/- and deposited 25% amount i.e. `5,62,500/- at the time of bid. It is alleged that the petitioner later on came to know that the width of the shop is less. He asked the respondents for clarification in this regard but the respondents did not pay any heed rather asked the petitioner to deposit the remaining amount of the bid price threatening that otherwise the amount already deposited by the petitioner would be forfeited.

Shorn of unnecessary details, the petitioner has failed before the Lok Adalat and also before this Court to show any evidence that the width/area VINOD KUMAR 2018.10.01 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

CWP No.22850 of 2018 [ 2 ] ***** of the shop was less. Though, during the course of hearing, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the area is 6 inches less but it is nowhere mentioned in the petition and thus the bid cannot be set aside on this ground. As a matter of fact, the petitioner has not lead any evidence in this regard and is only trying to wriggle out of the bid on the false pretext that the width/area of the shop is less.

Consequently, the present petition is hereby dismissed being denuded of any merit, though without any order as to costs. September 28, 2018 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge Whether speaking / reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No VINOD KUMAR 2018.10.01 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc