Rajeev Rana and Another vs Union Territory and Others

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.—In an open auction the petitioners and respondent No. 4 purchased the plot bearing No. 1436, Sector 40-B, Chandigarh for a consideration of Rs. 1,98,00,000/-. In the said plot, the share of petitioner No. 1 is 50%, petitioner No. 2 20% and respondent No. 4 30%. The allotment letter to the extent of the aforesaid share was issued in favour of all the three persons. Later on, on payment of all the sale consideration, the Conveyance Deed was executed in favour of the petitioners to the extent of the aforesaid share. When the petitioners herein, whose total share is 70%, approached respondent No. 3 for delivery of possession, it was insisted that until and unless the third co-sharer, i.e. respondent No. 4 comes together with the petitioners, the possession cannot be delivered to the petitioners. When the joint possession of the said plot was not delivered to the petitioners as per the Conveyance Deed already executed in their favour by the Chandigarh Administration, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

On July 17, 2013, the following order was passed:-

On perusal of the allotment letter dated 23.1.2009 and conveyance deed dated 27.2.2009/5.3.2009 both the petitioners have been recognized as owners of the plot in question to the extent of 70% share. The entire price of the plot has been paid. Learned counsel for the petitioners is praying for delivery of possession of the said plot to them to the extent of their share as the third co-sharer is not cooperating in taking the possession of the plot.

Prima-facie, we are of the view that in case the conveyance deed has been executed qua specific share of a person then to that extent the said person is entitled to possession.

Learned counsel for respondents seeks time to have instructions in the matter.

Adjourned to 26.7.2013.

Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 states that the Chandigarh Administration has no objection to deliver the possession but their concern is that any co-sharer may not raise any dispute and the site may not be fragmented.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that both the petitioners can be given the joint possession by specifically mentioning that the possession delivered to them will be considered a joint possession of all the three co-sharers. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 has no objection if the direction to that extent be given.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and respondents No. 1 to 3 are directed to deliver the joint possession of the plot to the petitioners by specifically mentioning that their possession shall be joint with respondent No. 4. It is made clear that before handing over the joint possession to the petitioners, it will be open for the Chandigarh Administration to give notice to respondent No. 4.