[2010] 7 S.C.R. 342 A STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. v. G.S. RANDHAWA (Civil Appeal No. 3392 of 2007) JUNE 3, 2010 B [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Punjab Urban Estate (Sale of Sites) Rules, 1965: c Allotment of plot - Liability of allottee to pay additional price - HELD: In view of the decision of the Court in Smt. · Fuljit Kaur* the judgment of the High Court is set aside - The demand notice is upheld -The appellants are entitled to make recovery in accordance with law. D *Smt. Fuljit Kaur vs. state of Punjab & Ors. (201 O] 7 SCR 317, relied on. Case Law Reference: (2010] 7 SCR 317 relied on para 2 E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3392 of 2007. From the Judgment and Order dated 6.12.2006 of the High F Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No. 2800 of 1992. Vijay Hansaria, (A.C.) and Ashok Mathur for the appearing parties. G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. We have heard Ms. Rachna Joshi lssar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In spite of notice, respondent did not enter appearance. We requested H 342 STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. v. G.S. RANDHAWA 343 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.] Sti. Vijay Hansaria, learned senior counsel for the respondent, A to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae. '

· 2. For the reasons recorded in Civil Appeal No. 5292 of 2004 (Smt. Fuljit Kaur Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.) decided on this date, the appeal stands allowed. Judgment and Order 8of the High Court dated 06.12.2006 is set aside and the Demand Notice is upheld. The appellant is entitled to make recovery in accordance with law. RP. Appeal allowed.

[2010] 7 S.C.R. 342 A STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. v. G.S. RANDHAWA (Civil Appeal No. 3392 of 2007) JUNE 3, 2010 B [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] Punjab Urban Estate (Sale of Sites) Rules, 1965: c Allotment of plot - Liability of allottee to pay additional price - HELD: In view of the decision of the Court in Smt. · Fuljit Kaur* the judgment of the High Court is set aside - The demand notice is upheld -The appellants are entitled to make recovery in accordance with law. D *Smt. Fuljit Kaur vs. state of Punjab & Ors. (201 O] 7 SCR 317, relied on. Case Law Reference: (2010] 7 SCR 317 relied on para 2 E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 3392 of 2007. From the Judgment and Order dated 6.12.2006 of the High F Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Writ Petition No. 2800 of 1992. Vijay Hansaria, (A.C.) and Ashok Mathur for the appearing parties. G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. We have heard Ms. Rachna Joshi lssar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In spite of notice, respondent did not enter appearance. We requested H 342 STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. v. G.S. RANDHAWA 343 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.] Sti. Vijay Hansaria, learned senior counsel for the respondent, A to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae. '

· 2. For the reasons recorded in Civil Appeal No. 5292 of 2004 (Smt. Fuljit Kaur Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.) decided on this date, the appeal stands allowed. Judgment and Order 8of the High Court dated 06.12.2006 is set aside and the Demand Notice is upheld. The appellant is entitled to make recovery in accordance with law. RP. Appeal allowed.