{"id":177062,"date":"2008-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008"},"modified":"2015-05-24T12:19:36","modified_gmt":"2015-05-24T06:49:36","slug":"ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008<\/div>\n
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                        AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n                                      C.W.P.No. 3083 of 2008\n                                      Date of Decision: 15.7.2008\n\n\n            M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems Limited.\n\n                                            ....... Petitioner through Shri Kirti\n                                                    Uppal, Advocate.\n\n                  Versus\n\n            Estate Officer-II, Haryana Urban Development Authority\n            (HUDA), Gurgaon and another.\n\n                                            ....... Respondents through Shri\n                                                   Ashok Aggarwal, Senior\n                                                  Advocate assisted by Shri\n                                                  Amit Aggarwal, Advocate.\n\n\n      CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIJENDER JAIN,\n             CHIEF JUSTICE\n             HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER\n\n                               ....\n<\/pre>\n
            1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to
\n               see the judgment?\n<\/p>\n
            2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n<\/p>\n
            3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?<\/p>\n
                               ….\n<\/p>\n
VIJENDER JAIN, CHIEF JUSTICE<\/p>\n
            The petitioner- M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems Limited,<\/p>\n
earlier known as M\/S Mehrasons Jewellery and Gems Limited, while<\/p>\n
invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226\/227 of the<\/p>\n
Constitution of India, has made multifarious prayers, but the challenge is<\/p>\n
essentially hovering around order dated 18.9.2007 (Annexure P9) vide<\/p>\n
which resumption order dated 24.6.1998 has been upheld. The petitioner<\/p>\n
seeks the quashing of these two orders.\n<\/p>\n
            The petitioner was allotted an institutional plot by respondent
\n                             C.W.P.No.3083 of 2008<\/p>\n
                                       -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                       ….\n<\/p>\n
\nno.1 in the year 1995 after its representative was interviewed on 18.4.1995<\/p>\n
and its eligibility, according to the norms, was found to be acceptable. Plot<\/p>\n
No. 24 situated in Sector 32, Gurgaon having a tentative area of 2035 square<\/p>\n
meters was allotted to the petitioner vide allotment letter dated 28.6.1995 at<\/p>\n
a tentative price of Rs.46,80,500\/-.\n<\/p>\n
            Shorn off other details, one of the primary requirements of the<\/p>\n
allotment letter was the schedule of payment which was contained in Clause<\/p>\n
5 of the letter. However, the petitioner failed to conform to the same which<\/p>\n
ultimately led to the plot being resumed on 24.6.1998.<\/p>\n
            A spate of representations and proceedings were instituted by<\/p>\n
the petitioner trying to stall the resumption of the plot and as a consequence,<\/p>\n
it made endeavours to seek the possession of the plot, which was ultimately<\/p>\n
negatived by the respondent no.2 vide order dated 18.9.2007.<\/p>\n
            The sole grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner was<\/p>\n
that the petitioner was never associated with the proceedings. The petitioner<\/p>\n
when applied for the allotment of plot, gave its address as S-555, Greater<\/p>\n
Kailash, Part-II, New Delhi and subsequently, the charge of address was<\/p>\n
notified to the respondents, but they continued to correspond with it at the<\/p>\n
address which did not belong to the petitioner at all. The most of the<\/p>\n
correspondence of the respondents addressed to the petitioner is at S-55,<\/p>\n
Greater Kailash, Part-II, New Delhi. This, according to the petitioner,<\/p>\n
resulted in non-communication of the letters\/ orders and, therefore, it could<\/p>\n
not meet the requirements as desired of the petitioner by the respondents<\/p>\n
and its representative as he was never associated with the proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
                             C.W.P.No.3083 of 2008<\/p>\n
                                     -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                     ….\n<\/p>\n
\n             Shri Kirti Uppal, learned counsel for the petitioner, very<\/p>\n
strenuously highlighted the grievance of the petitioner as detailed above.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, this Court summoned the records of the respondents to<\/p>\n
understand the grievance of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
             The records have been produced and we have perused the same<\/p>\n
with the assistance of Shri Ashok Aggarwal, learned Senior Advocate<\/p>\n
appearing for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
             There is no dispute that the petitioner was associated with the<\/p>\n
proceedings as is noticed in the impugned order till February,1997 when the<\/p>\n
communications were being addressed at the correct address given by the<\/p>\n
petitioner. Thereafter, the impugned order was silent on this aspect. The<\/p>\n
record, however, belies the contention of the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner totally.\n<\/p>\n
             For the first time, notice under Section 17(1) and (2) of the<\/p>\n
Haryana Urban Development Authority Act,1977 (for short, `the Act’) was<\/p>\n
issued to the petitioner on 16.1.1997 and a reply to it was filed by the<\/p>\n
petitioner on 6.2.1997. On 12.2.2007, the representative of the petitioner<\/p>\n
was heard and it was asked to pay the whole amount due up to 17.2.1997,<\/p>\n
which was not done and the respondents thereafter sent notice under Section<\/p>\n
17(3) of the Act by registered post on 9.12.1997. The petitioner asked for<\/p>\n
the accounts statement vide its letter dated 28.1.1998 and the respondents<\/p>\n
communicated to it vide their letter dated 4.2.1998 that an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.72,09,853\/- was due. On 10.2.1998, a notice under Section 17(4) of the<\/p>\n
Act was sent and the petitioner was asked to come present on 27.2.1998 for
\n                            C.W.P.No.3083 of 2008<\/p>\n
                                     -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                     ….\n<\/p>\n
\npersonal hearing.\n<\/p>\n
            The representative of the petitioner came present on 27.2.1998<\/p>\n
with a demand draft of Rs.10 lacs, which was not accepted by the<\/p>\n
respondents in view of the fact that the amount in question was<\/p>\n
Rs.72,09,853\/- and he was informed that the date of hearing would be<\/p>\n
3.3.1998.\n<\/p>\n
            The representative of the petitioner again presented himself<\/p>\n
with a demand draft of Rs.10 lacs on 3.3.1998 which was not accepted by<\/p>\n
the respondents, who demanded the entire amount due within a period of ten<\/p>\n
days, failing which resumption order shall be passed. Thereafter, from 1998<\/p>\n
till 2006, the petitioner was facing recovery proceedings from its bankers<\/p>\n
and the company was also constrained to go to the BIFER. On 12.6.2006,<\/p>\n
the petitioner again approached the respondents for the plot and its request<\/p>\n
was declined. The petitioner filed an appeal       on 4.7.2006 against the<\/p>\n
resumption order which was       passed on    24.5.1998 and the same was<\/p>\n
dismissed on 18.9.2007.\n<\/p>\n
      A perusal of the record reveals that the communications were sent at<\/p>\n
an address which was alien to the petitioner, i.e., S-55, Greater Kailash,<\/p>\n
Part-II, New Delhi, even though the petitioner had intimated its changed<\/p>\n
address as Plot Nos. 3 and 4, Udyog Vihar, Phase IV, Gurgaon, yet, it has<\/p>\n
not caused any prejudice to the petitioner, as its representative had<\/p>\n
associated himself with the proceedings till the time the resumption order<\/p>\n
was passed in the year 1998. The record further reveals that the Estate<\/p>\n
Officer had, for the first time, communicated to the petitioner that a sum of
\n                             C.W.P.No.3083 of 2008<\/p>\n
                                      -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                      ….\n<\/p>\n
\nRs.72,09,853.55 vide letter dated 4.2.1998, which was sent at S-55, Greater<\/p>\n
Kailash, Part-II, New Delhi. Despite this, the representative of the petitioner<\/p>\n
had presented himself on 27.2.1998 as desired by the respondents. This is<\/p>\n
borne out from the communication written by the petitioner to the Estate<\/p>\n
Officer on 3.3.1998 with reference to the meeting dated 27.2.1998. On<\/p>\n
3.3.1998, the representative of the petitioner presented himself with a<\/p>\n
demand draft of Rs.10 lacs which was not accepted by the respondents and<\/p>\n
thereafter, notice under Section 17(4) of the Act was issued to the petitioner,<\/p>\n
which was also acknowledged by it. Thus, it is apparent from these<\/p>\n
communications exchanged inter se between the petitioner and the<\/p>\n
respondents that even though, in all these communications\/ orders written<\/p>\n
by the respondents the address of the petitioner is S-55, Greater Kailash,<\/p>\n
Part-II, New Delhi, yet, its representative was continuously responding to<\/p>\n
the same and he had presented himself for personal hearing.<\/p>\n
            It, therefore, does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner that a<\/p>\n
prejudice has been caused to it only because the orders\/ communications<\/p>\n
were being sent to an alien address. That apart, even if this argument were<\/p>\n
to be accepted, then also, the petitioner remained silent from 3.3.1998 till<\/p>\n
the year 2006 without any cogent explanation. The plot, in the meantime,<\/p>\n
had been allotted in December, 2005 to some one else. The petitioner has<\/p>\n
not impleaded the subsequent allottee as a party to the writ petition, who<\/p>\n
was undoubtedly an essential party as any order passed qua the plot in<\/p>\n
question would have a fall-out on the rights of such allottee.<\/p>\n
            For the aforesaid reasons when the petitioner has failed to show
\n                              C.W.P.No.3083 of 2008<\/p>\n
                                      -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
                                      ….\n<\/p>\n
\nany prejudice caused to it on account of letters\/ orders sent at a different<\/p>\n
address than the one given by it; as its representative had associated himself<\/p>\n
with the proceedings, as also the fact that it has chosen to sleep over its<\/p>\n
rights since 1998 without any justifiable explanation and the fact that the<\/p>\n
subsequent allottee has not been impleaded as a party, we refrain from<\/p>\n
exercising our jurisdiction under Articles 226\/227 of the Constitution of<\/p>\n
India in favour of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
             The petition is accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                                ( Vijender Jain )\n                                                 Chief Justice\n\n\nJuly 15,2008                                    ( Mahesh Grover )\n\"SCM\"                                               Judge\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P.No. 3083 of 2008 Date of Decision: 15.7.2008 M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems Limited. ……. Petitioner through Shri Kirti Uppal, Advocate. Versus Estate Officer-II, Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-177062","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-24T06:49:36+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-24T06:49:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1275,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-24T06:49:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-24T06:49:36+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-24T06:49:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008"},"wordCount":1275,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008","name":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems ... vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-24T06:49:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-enchante-jewellery-gems-vs-estate-officer-ii-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Enchante Jewellery & Gems … vs Estate Officer-Ii on 15 July, 2008"}]},{"@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\/177062","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=177062"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177062\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177062"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177062"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177062"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}