Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S Pridhvi Asset Reconstruction And ... vs State Of Haryana And Others on 9 August, 2017

Bench: Ajay Kumar Mittal, Amit Rawal

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH


121                              Civil Writ Petition No.17624 of 2017
                                 Date of Decision: August 09, 2017


M/s Pridhvi Asset Reconstruction and Securitization Company Ltd.

                                                     ...Petitioner

            versus

State of Haryana and others                          ...Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

                                 *****

Present:    Mr. Vipul Dharmani, Advocate
            for the petitioner.
                                *****

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral)

The prayer in this petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 18.07.2017 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.2, purportedly exercising powers under Section 130 of the Haryana Municipal Corporation Act, 1994, attaching the property in question and further putting the same on public auction on 08.08.2017 to recover the dues on account of property tax and fire tax.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the representation had been submitted by the petitioner to the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Gurugram on 01.08.2017 (Annexure P-7) but the same has not been decided so far. It was 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 08:37:33 ::: Civil Writ Petition No.17624 of 2017 -2-

------

prayed that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Gurugram by way of filing a detailed and comprehensive representation at the first instance. It was also prayed that the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach this Court again, in case, any adverse decision on the representation to be filed by the petitioner is taken by the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Gurugram.

3. Dismissed as withdrawn. It shall, however, be open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedies as may be available to it, in accordance with law.




                                                 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL)
                                                        JUDGE



                                                    (AMIT RAWAL)
August 09, 2017                                       JUDGE
sonia gugnani



                Whether speaking/reasoned?                       Yes/No

                Whether reportable?                              Yes/No




                                      2 of 2
                   ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2017 08:37:35 :::