Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Investigation by Trap Leader Prejudiced the Case: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Conviction in PC Case VAT | Notice Issued Beyond Limitation Period Cannot Reopen Assessment: Kerala High Court Fishing Inquiry Not Permissible Under Section 91, Cr.P.C.: High Court Quashes Trial Court’s Order Directing CBI to Produce Unrelied Statements and Case Diary Vague and Omnibus Allegations Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution in Matrimonial Disputes: Calcutta High Court High Court Emphasizes Assessee’s Burden of Proof in Unexplained Cash Deposits Case Effective, efficient, and expeditious alternative remedies have been provided by the statute: High Court Dismisses Petition for New Commercial Electricity Connection Permissive Use Cannot Ripen into Right of Prescriptive Easement: Kerala High Court High Court Slams Procedural Delays, Orders FSL Report in Assault Case to Prevent Miscarriage of Justice Petitioner Did Not Endorse Part-Payments on Cheque; Section 138 NI Act Not Attracted: Madras High Court Minority Christian Schools Not Bound by Rules of 2018; Disciplinary Proceedings Can Continue: High Court of Calcutta Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights Home Station Preferences Upheld in Transfer Case: Kerala High Court Overrules Tribunal on Teachers' Transfer Policy Failure to Formally Request Cross-Examination Does Not Invalidate Assessment Order: Calcutta High Court

No Need for NOC from Land Owners in Case of Lease Deed: High Court Upholds Candidature for LPG Distributorship

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, led by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal, upheld the selection of respondent No.4 for LPG distributorship at Balachaur, District SBS Nagar, dismissing the petitions filed against the Union of India and others in the cases of CWP-9511-2018 (O&M) and CWP-24497-2019.

Justice Bansal, in his detailed judgment, clarified the nuances of land lease requirements for LPG distributorship applications. The judge observed, "In case of lease deed, there is no concept of seeking NOC from owners of land," thus addressing a key contention of the petitioner, Mr. Ashish Duggal. This pivotal clarification steered the course of the judgment, emphasizing the distinction between the ownership and lease deed scenarios in such applications.

The case revolved around the procedural aspects of the selection process undertaken by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (Corporation) for the allotment of LPG distributorships. The petitioner challenged the candidature of respondent No.4, asserting procedural deficiencies in the selection process. The primary focus was on the validity of the lease deed and the requirement of notarized affidavits from co-owners of the leased land.

Justice Bansal meticulously examined the clauses of the brochure issued by the Corporation, highlighting, "The respondent No.4 was sole lessee of the offered lease land and she was not required to get 'NOC' from anyone." This observation was central to the dismissal of the petitions, as it affirmed the compliance of respondent No.4 with the brochure requirements set forth in August 2013.

The Court also addressed the issue of the land being mortgaged prior to the lease, noting that there was no restriction in the brochure against executing a lease deed for mortgaged land. In this context, the Court found no reason to invalidate the lease deed or the selection process.

Date of Decision : 20.01.2024

ASHISH DUGGAL VS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.     

 

Similar News