{"id":133354,"date":"1969-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1969-09-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969"},"modified":"2018-08-10T22:48:25","modified_gmt":"2018-08-10T17:18:25","slug":"estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","title":{"rendered":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1978, \t\t  1970 SCR  (2) 534<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: V Ramaswami<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ramaswami, V.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nESTATES DEVELOPMENT LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nUNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n22\/09\/1969\n\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMI, V.\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMI, V.\nSHAH, J.C.\nGROVER, A.N.\n\nCITATION:\n 1970 AIR 1978\t\t  1970 SCR  (2) 534\n 1969 SCC  (3)\t39\n CITATOR INFO :\n D\t    1971 SC 771\t (6)\n\n\nACT:\n    Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation)\t Act\n(44    of  1954),  s.  24(2)---Order  of  Cheif\t  Settlement\nCommissioner--Conditions precedent for making.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    By\ta  sale\t deed  executed on  November  24,  1944\t the\nappellant company purchased certain land located in an\tarea\nnow part of West Pakistan. After the partition of India, the\ncompany,  on  the  basis  of a\tregistered  sale  deed,\t was\nallotted  certain land in Kapurthala in 1950 in lieu of\t the\nland  abandoned\t in  Pakistan.\t On a  report  made  by\t the\nManaging  Officer,  Respondeat\tNo. 3  on  August  30,\t1960\nrecommending  cancellation of the allotment of land  to\t the\ncompany and after hearing the company, the chief  Settlement\nCommissioner  rejected the registered sale deed and came  to\nthe conclusion that at the time of partition the company did\nnot own any land in Pakistan nor was it in occupation of any\nsuch  land. Therefore by his order dated February 27,  1961,\nhe set aside the permanent rights acquired by the company.\nHELD: The order of the Chief Settlement\t Commissioner\tmust\nbe  quashed  on the ground that there is no finding  of\t the\nChief Settlement Commissioner that the company had  obtained\nallotment   of\t the  land  \"by\t means\t of   fraud,   false\nrepresentation\tor concealment of any material fact\"  within\nthe  meaning  of s. 24(2) of the Act.  It is true  that\t the\nChief  Settlement Commissioner had recorded a  finding\tthat\nthe company had not proved its title to any land in the area\nnow  part  of Pakistan and the allotment  was  \"undeserved\".\nBut  this is not tantamount to a finding that the  allotment\nhad  been  obtained by a false representation  or  fraud  or\nconcealment  of\t material  facts.   Such  a  finding  is   a\ncondition precedent for faking action under s. 24(2) of\t the\nAct.  The condition imposed by the section is mandatory\t and\nin  the\t absence of any such finding  the  Chief  Settlement\nCommissioner  had  no jurisdiction to cancel  the  allotment\nmade to the company under s. 24(2) of the Act. [537 A--D]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1576 of 1966.<br \/>\n    Appeal  from the judgment and ordered dated October\t 26.<br \/>\n1965  of the Punjab High Court in Letters Patent Appeal\t No.<br \/>\n174 of 1964.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Bishan  Narain,  S.K.  Mehta and  K.L.  Mehta,  for\t the<br \/>\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>Harbans Singh and R.N. Sachthey, for the respondents.<br \/>\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n    Ramaswami,\tJ.   In\t the  month  of\t August,  1942\t the<br \/>\nappellant  company  (hereinafter  called  the  Company)\t was<br \/>\nincorporated  -with  its registered office in  the  city  of<br \/>\nJullundur dealing in sale<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">535<\/span><br \/>\nand purchase of land as its substantial business.  By a sale<br \/>\ndeed executed on November 24, 1944 the company purchased 646<br \/>\nkarnals,  9 marlas of land  from Harjit Singh  for   a\t sum<br \/>\nof Rs. 32,326\/-.  The land was located in village  Monanpura<br \/>\nof  District Sheikupura, now in West Pakistan.\tOut  of\t the<br \/>\nconsideration  for the sale, a sum of Rs. 9,000\/&#8217;- was\tleft<br \/>\nwith the company for payment to the previous mortgagees\t and<br \/>\nthe balance of the money was paid to Harjit Singh before the<br \/>\nSub-Registrar at the time of registration.  On the basis  of<br \/>\nthe  registered\t sale  deed  the  company  was\tallotted  27<br \/>\nstandard  acres\t and 11 1\/2 units of  land  village  Bohani,<br \/>\nTehsil Phagwara District Kapurthala in the year 1950 in lieu<br \/>\nof the land abandoned in Pakistan.  A sanad no. K2\/4\/8 dated<br \/>\nMarch  9, 1950 was issued in favour of the  company.   There<br \/>\nwas  consolidation  of holdings in village Bohani and  as  a<br \/>\nresult\tof  consolidation the area allotted to\tthe  company<br \/>\ncame  to  23 kanals and 5 marlas.  Out of this\tthe  company<br \/>\nsold  9-1\/2 kanals to Mohan Singh, a Jar of  village  Bohani<br \/>\nfor Rs. 1900.00 by registered sale deed dated May 22,  1956.<br \/>\nAnother\t portion  of 220 kanals and 15 marlas  was  sold  on<br \/>\nSeptember 12, 1958 for Rs. 10,012\/- to one Mehnga Singh\t and<br \/>\nhis sons.  It was later discovered that the company had been<br \/>\nallotted  less\tarea of land than it was entitled  to  as  a<br \/>\nresult\tof  consolidation operations and so.  an  additional<br \/>\narea  of  24 kanals was allotted to the company\t in  village<br \/>\nBohani\tto make up the deficiency.  On August 30,  1960\t the<br \/>\nManaging Officer, respondent no. 3, made a report,  Annexure<br \/>\nC,  to the Chief Settlement Commissioner, Respondent  no.  2<br \/>\nrecommending  cancellation of the allotment of land  to\t the<br \/>\ncompany\t and consequently the grant of permanent  rights  to<br \/>\nit.    The  company  was  heard\t by  the  Chief\t  Settlement<br \/>\nCommissioner\tand   thereafter   the\t Chief\t  Settlement<br \/>\nCommissioner  rejected the registered sale deed and  balance<br \/>\nsheets and relying on the jamabandi, annexure X, came to the<br \/>\nconclusion that at the time of partition the company did not<br \/>\nown  any, land in Pakistan nor was it in occupation  of\t any<br \/>\nsuch land.  By his order dated February 27, 1961  respondent<br \/>\nno. 2 set aside the permanent rights acquired by the company<br \/>\nto  the\t extent of 27 standard acres, 111\/2 units  and\talso<br \/>\ncancelled  the quasi-permanent &#8216;allotment of the ,land\tmade<br \/>\nin  the name of the company.  On March 29, 1961\t a  revision<br \/>\npetition was filed by the company to the Central Government,<br \/>\nrespondent  no. 1.  But the revision petition was  dismissed<br \/>\non  May 10, 1961. On June 8, 1961 the company filed  a\twrit<br \/>\npetition  under\t Art. 226 of the  Constitution\tpraying\t for<br \/>\ngrant  of a writ to quash the order of the Chief  Settlement<br \/>\nCommissioner dated February 27, 1961. The writ petition\t was<br \/>\nallowed by Shamshat Bahadur, J.\t But the respondent took the<br \/>\nmatter\tin  appeal  under  el. 10 of  Letters  Patent  to  a<br \/>\nDivision  Bench which reversed the judgment of\tthe  learned<br \/>\nsingle Judge and ordered the writ petition to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">536<\/span><\/p>\n<p>    Section  24 of the Displaced Persons  (Compensation\t and<br \/>\nRehabilitation)\t Act, 1954 (44 of 1954) (hereinafter  called<br \/>\nthe Act) states:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t  &#8220;(1) The Chief Settlement Commissioner may<br \/>\n\t      at   any\ttime  call  for\t the  record   o\/any<br \/>\n\t      proceeding   under   this\t Act  in   which   a<br \/>\n\t      Settlement Officer,  an  Assistant  Settlement<br \/>\n\t      Officer, an Assistant Settlement Commissioner,<br \/>\n\t      an   Additional  Settlement  Commissioner,   a<br \/>\n\t      Settlement Commissioner, a managing officer or<br \/>\n\t      a managing corporation has passed an order for<br \/>\n\t      the  purpose of satisfying himself as  to\t the<br \/>\n\t      legality\tor propriety of any such  order\t and<br \/>\n\t      may pass such order in relation thereto as  he<br \/>\n\t      thinks fit.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t  (2) Without prejudice to the generality of<br \/>\n\t      the foregoing power under sub-section (1 ), if<br \/>\n\t      the Chief Settlement Commissioner is satisfied<br \/>\n\t      that any order for payment of compensation  to<br \/>\n\t      a\t  displaced   person   or   any\t  lease\t  or<br \/>\n\t      &#8216;allotment  granted to such a person has\tbeen<br \/>\n\t      obtained\tby  him\t by means  of  fraud,  false<br \/>\n\t      representation or concealment of any  material<br \/>\n\t      fact, then, notwithstanding anything contained<br \/>\n\t      in this Act, the Chief Settlement Commissioner<br \/>\n\t      may   pass   an  order   directing   that\t  no<br \/>\n\t      compensation shall be paid to such a person or<br \/>\n\t      reducing the amount of compensation to be paid<br \/>\n\t      to  him, or as the case may be, canceling\t the<br \/>\n\t      lease or &#8216;allotment granted to him; &#8216;and if it<br \/>\n\t      is found that a displaced person has been paid<br \/>\n\t      compensation  which is not payable to him,  or<br \/>\n\t      which  is in excess of the amount\t payable  to<br \/>\n\t      him,  Such amount or excess, as the  case\t may<br \/>\n\t      be,  may on a certificate issued by the  Chief<br \/>\n\t      Settlement  Commissioner be recovered  in\t the<br \/>\n\t      same manner as an arrear of land revenue.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>In  support of the appeal it was contended on behalf of\t the<br \/>\ncompany\t that the document described as jamabandi,  annexure<br \/>\nII to writ petition, was not the jamabandi of the year 1946-<br \/>\n47  of\tthe land in dispute and the Division  Bench  was  in<br \/>\nerror  in  holding that the  Chief  Settlement\tCommissioner<br \/>\ncould properly rely upon annexure .  It was pointed out that<br \/>\nannexure  II  was  not\tthe jamabandi  for  1946-47  but  it<br \/>\nconsisted  of three notes one saying &#8220;Maamur bai&#8221;, that\t is,<br \/>\nthat  there  is no land of non-Muslims in the  village.\t the<br \/>\nsecond\tnote  related  to Kartar Chand and  Gopal  Dass\t who<br \/>\nembraced Islam and the third related to sale of his land  by<br \/>\nHarjit\tSingh in favour of S.A. Latif.\tAll these notes\t are<br \/>\ndated May 3, 1951.  It was pointed out that these notes were<br \/>\nmade on May 3,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">537<\/span><br \/>\n1961  for  the\tpurposes of exchange of\t jamabandi  and\t the<br \/>\ndocument  did not depict the state of affairs as  on  August<br \/>\n15,  1947 which was the material date.\tIt is not  necessary<br \/>\nto  examine  this document in detail for we are\t of  opinion<br \/>\nthat  the appeal must be allowed and the order of the  Chief<br \/>\nSettlement  Commissioner must be quashed on the ground\tthat<br \/>\nthere  is  no finding of the Chief  Settlement\tCommissioner<br \/>\nthat  the Company had obtained allotment    of the land\t &#8220;by<br \/>\nmeans  of fraud, false representation or concealment of\t any<br \/>\nmaterial  fact&#8221; within the meaning of s. 24(2) of  the\tAct.<br \/>\nIt  is\ttrue that the  Chief  Settlement  Commissioner\t had<br \/>\nrecorded a finding that the company had not proved its title<br \/>\nto  any\t land  in village Momonpura and\t the  allotment\t was<br \/>\n&#8220;undeserved&#8221;.  But this is not tantamount to a finding\tthat<br \/>\nthe allotment had been obtained by a false representation or<br \/>\nfraud or concealment of material facts.\t Such a finding is a<br \/>\ncondition precedent for taking action under s. 24(2) of\t the<br \/>\nAct.  The condition imposed by the section is mandatory\t and<br \/>\nin  the\t absence of any such finding  the  Chief  Settlement<br \/>\nCommissioner  had ,no jurisdiction to cancel  the  allotment<br \/>\nmade  to the company under s. 24(2) of the Act.\t  For  these<br \/>\nreasons\t we hold that the appeal should be allowed  and\t the<br \/>\njudgment  of  the Division Bench dated October 26,  1965  in<br \/>\nLetters Patent Appeal should be reversed and the judgment of<br \/>\nShamshat  Bahadur, J., dated November 28, 1963 quashing\t the<br \/>\norder  of the Chief Settlement Commissioner  dated  February<br \/>\n27, 1961 should be restored.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs.<br \/>\nR.K.P.S.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeal allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">538<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1978, 1970 SCR (2) 534 Author: V Ramaswami Bench: Ramaswami, V. PETITIONER: ESTATES DEVELOPMENT LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 22\/09\/1969 BENCH: RAMASWAMI, V. BENCH: RAMASWAMI, V. SHAH, J.C. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-133354","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969\",\"datePublished\":\"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\"},\"wordCount\":1267,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\",\"name\":\"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969","datePublished":"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969"},"wordCount":1267,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969","name":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1969-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-10T17:18:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/estates-development-ltd-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-september-1969#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Estates Development Ltd vs Union Of India &amp; Ors on 22 September, 1969"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133354","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=133354"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/133354\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=133354"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=133354"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=133354"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}