M/S SETHI BUILDCONPVT LTDTHROUGH ITS DIRECTOR DULYAUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE RAJ KUMAR SETHI v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
CWP/12012/2025 · 2025-08-05
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 51913 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 51913 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. 123 CWP-12012-2025 (O&M). Date of Decision: 05.08.2025. M/s Sethi Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner. VERSUS State of Haryana and another ....Respondents. ***
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL --- Present: Mr. Arun Sethi, Advocate; Mr. Sachin Tejan, Advocate; Mr. Anshu Gautam, Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anant Kataria, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate Ms. Ashna Singh, Advocate and Ms. Saanvi Singla, Advocate for respondent No.2-HSVP. **** ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been allotted an institutional site for setting up of a nursing home and was offered possession letter on 28.01.2023. The petitioner has made entire payment as stipulated in the terms and conditions of the allotment but the possession of the site has not been handed over to the petitioner on date. JITENDER 2025.08.06 09:40 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC
CWP-12012-2025 (O&M) -2-
2.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2-HSVP upon instructions from Mr. Sudeep, E.O. 11, Gurugram, submits that the possession of the site could not be handed over to the petitioner as some work including shifting of electrical poles and wires was incomplete. He submits that the process is likely to be completed within a period of two months. The petitioner thereafter would be handed over the possession of the allotted site and in terms of Clause-7 of the allotment letter, respondent No.2 would consider making payment of interest at the rate of 5.5% per annum for the delay in handing over the possession on the amount deposited by the petitioner.
3. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for respondent No.2, the grievance of the petitioner appears to have been substantially redressed. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (SHALINI SINGH NAGPAL)
JUDGE 05.08.2025 jitender Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No JITENDER 2025.08.06 09:40 I attest to the accuracy of this document PHHC