http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: R.C. CHAWLA

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       12/01/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (2) 151        JT 1996 (1)   633  1996 SCALE  (1)SP38

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      As per  the orders of this Court passed earlier, if the appellant wants  to avail  of the  allotment, he necessarily has  to   comply   with   the   conditions   of   allotment. Consequently, he  cannot use  allotted residential  premises for commercial purpose. The appellant has filed an affidavit verified on  January 4,  1996 stating,  among other  things, thus :      "That as  per the  order  of  Honourable      Supreme Court  of India,  I have got the      commercial  use   of  my  house  stopped      w.e.f. 2.1.96.           The above  statement is true to the      best of my knowledge."      The learned  counsel for the respondents states that he does not  have any  information as  to what  was the  action taken by  the authorities  in that  behalf. Shri S.K. Bagga, the learned counsel has shown to the learned counsel for the respondents that  the statement also was communicated to the HUDA and  the respondents. The respondents are at liberty to verify whether the appellant had stopped use of the premises for commercial  use w.e.f.  January 2,  1996 and on being so satisfied,  they  are  directed  to  withdraw  the  impugned resumption order.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.