PETITIONER:
R.C. CHAWLA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/01/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
G.B. PATTANAIK (J)
CITATION:
1996 SCC (2) 151 JT 1996 (1) 633
1996 SCALE (1)SP38
ACT
HEADNOTE
JUDGMENT
ORDER
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.