http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: KASHMIR CHAND

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER,HARYANA & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       15/07/1996

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

CITATION:  JT 1996 (7)     5        1996 SCALE  (5)510

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                  THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 1996 Present.           Hon’ble Mr.Justice K.Ramaswamy           Hon’ble Mr.Justice G.B.Pattanaik K.B.Rohtagi and Ms. Aprana Rohtagi, Advs. for the appellent R.Bana, Adv. for the Respondents                          O R D E R The following Order of the Court was delivered: Kashmir Chand V. Financial Commissioner, Haryana & Ors.                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have heard learned counsel on both sides.      Admittedly, the  plot was  sold in an open auction held in July,  1971 for  a sum  of Rs.46,000/-. The appellant has paid only  11,500/-. He  was  due  of  the  balance  sum  of Rs.34,500/- In  terms of  the auction,  he had  not complied with the  payment for  well over  21 years. Consequently, he was demanded  payment of  a sum  of Rs.3,78,000/-  which  he defaulted to  pay. When allotment was sought to be cancelled he calling that action in question, filed a writ petition to the High Court. Pending writ petition, the High Court passed an  order   in  a  civil  miscellaneous  case.  Therein  the appellant had  asserted that  he had  deposited the  sum  of Rs.34,500/- on  September 21,  1992. The Court found that in case the  said  amount  of  Rs.34,500/-  was  deposited,  as contended  by   the  appellant,   the  balance   amount   of Rs.3,43,500 was  directed to  be deposited  but he  had  not done. Consequently,  the writ  petition was dismissed and an appeal in  the impugned  order in  MPA No.355/93  dated 19th August, 1993,  the order  of the  learned single  Judge  was confirmed.      Though time  was taken for filing the counter, the same was not  filed by the respondents. It is stated by Shri K.B.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Rohtagi, learned  counsel for the appellant, that his client had already  deposited two  instalments of  the amount  with interest @  12% and  one instalment  is due.  We prima facie accept the  statement of  the counsel to be correct. In case those payments  have already  been made,  the  appellant  is given liberty to pay the balance amount within a period of 4 months from  today. In  case he has not already deposited or if he  commits default in payment of the amount as directed, this order  would stand  vacated and  the order  of the High Court would stand restored.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.