Law:

Section:

Settlement Scheme No. VIII------S. 1(1)(1-A)---Phrase 'available property' as used in Settlement Scheme No.VIII---Meaning---Cancellation of allotment---Allotment in favour of tenant under Settlement Scheme No. VIII---Pre-condition---Rehabilitation Authorities allotted disputed shop to appellant in year 1959, against price determined as Rs.8400/---Appellant made payment of Rs.2448 and Permanent Transfer Order was issued in his favour---Additional Settlement Commissioner cancelled the Permanent Transfer Order for the reason that despite two notices, the appellant failed to deposit balance amount---Respondent, who was tenant in the disputed shop was allotted the shop under Settlement Scheme No. VIII, on the ground that it was available property of which the respondent was in possession---Settlement Authorities declined to restore the allotment of appellant---Decision of Settlement Authorities was maintained by High Court on the ground that notices were duly served upon appellant---Validity---No notice through post under acknowledgement due was sent to appellant---Person on whom the service was effected was neither heir of appellant nor he was so intimately connected with appellant to raise a presumption that the service was effected on the appellant---Such service was no service in the eyes of law---Disputed shop could only be 'available property' if it had yet to be transferred to anyone or it had been resumed from an allottee lawfully---Since the cancellation of allotment of appellant had been found to be not sustainable in law, the shop could not be classified as 'available property' within the meaning of Settlement Scheme No. VIII---Respondent was tenant of appellant in the disputed shop and his claim for allotment under Settlement Scheme No. VIII on the basis of possession was misconceived because he was not in possession of the shop in his own rights but as a tenant---Constructive possession was that of the appellant in his capacity as owner/landlord of disputed shop---Condition precedent for allotment under Settlement Scheme No. VIII i.e. possession of respondent was missing and the same could not have been allotted to respondent---Judgment of High Court…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492