{"id":255550,"date":"2008-11-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008"},"modified":"2016-11-14T07:21:20","modified_gmt":"2016-11-14T01:51:20","slug":"world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                                  [1]\n\n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n                     Civil Writ Petition No.9367 of 2008\n                                             Date of decision: 4.11.2008\n\nWorld Renewal Spiritual Trust through its\nBranch Manager, Brahma Kumar Amir Chand.\n                                          ....Petitioner.\n\n                            Versus\n\nUnion Territory, Chandgarh and others\n                                                     ....Respondents.\n\n\nCORAM:        HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE UMA NATH SINGH.\n              HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY.\n\n\nPresent:      Mr.Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate assisted by\n              Mr.Vishal Garg, Advocate for petitioner.\n              Mr.Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3.\n\n\n\nDAYA CHAUDHARY, J.\n<\/pre>\n
              The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of<\/p>\n
order dated July 18, 2007 (Annexure P-15) vide which the Letter of<\/p>\n
Intent issued to the petitioner in respect of allotment of additional<\/p>\n
land on lease hold basis was withdrawn as the petitioner had failed<\/p>\n
to deposit 25% of the premium within the stipulated period.<\/p>\n
              The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-Trust<\/p>\n
was allotted site measuring 1494.56 sq. yds in Sector 33-A,<\/p>\n
Chandigarh, at the rate of Rs.75\/- per sq. yd for construction of Trust<\/p>\n
centre on leasehold basis for 99 years vide Letter of Intent dated<\/p>\n
25.1.1983. The construction thereon was raised by the petitioner.<\/p>\n
\n\nVide letter dated 3.12.1984, the petitioner-Trust            requested         the\n\nrespondent       authorities       for   allotment   of   adjoining     plot    of\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                                    [2]\n\n<\/pre>\n
approximately 2000 sq. yds on the ground that as the activities of<\/p>\n
the Trust were            expanding rapidly, therefore accommodation<\/p>\n
available with them was insufficient. Accordingly, vide Letter of<\/p>\n
Intent dated 27.1.1986,            the petitioner trust was allotted additional<\/p>\n
land measuring 5 kanal, adjacent to the existing site of the petitioner<\/p>\n
trust, at the rate of Rs.130\/- per sq. yds on leasehold basis for 99<\/p>\n
years. It was specified in the said Letter of intent that in addition to<\/p>\n
the premium of land, ground rent at the usual rising scales shall also<\/p>\n
be chargeable. It was also a condition in the Letter of Intent that<\/p>\n
allotment shall be made on payment of 25% premium of the site.<\/p>\n
Though in the Letter of Intent dated 27.1.1986 the petitioner -Trust<\/p>\n
was allotted additional 5 kanals of land, but the Superintending<\/p>\n
Engineer Construction Circle had given area of the said site as<\/p>\n
2113.333 sq.yds. Accordingly vide Letter of Intent dated 19.2.1990,<\/p>\n
additional land measuring 2113.333 sq.yds (4.23 kanals) was allotted<\/p>\n
to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.130\/- per sq.yds on lease-hold basis<\/p>\n
for 99 years. In that letter it was mentioned that amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.81500\/- already paid by the petitioner shall stand adjusted<\/p>\n
towards 25% of the total premium of land. In the meantime,<\/p>\n
petitioner submitted yet another request vide letter dated 14.10.1993<\/p>\n
for allotment of additional 25 feet wide strip of land.<\/p>\n
              On the basis of the recommendations of the Screening<\/p>\n
Committee, the petitioner            was allotted additional land measuring<\/p>\n
501.92 sq. yds at the rate of Rs. 5800\/- per sq. yd vide letter dated<\/p>\n
24.4.2000. In that letter, the petitioner was required to deposit a sum<\/p>\n
of Rs.7,27,784\/- to cover 25% tentative premium along with an<\/p>\n
undertaking on Non Judicial Stamp Paper within 30 days from the
\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                               [3]<\/p>\n
date of issuance of the said letter. It is clearly mentioned therein<\/p>\n
that allotment letter would        be issued on receipt of 25% earnest<\/p>\n
money along with the requisite undertaking. The petitioner did not<\/p>\n
deposit the amount of Rs.7,27,784\/- (as 25% earnest money) within<\/p>\n
30 days from the date of issuance of Letter of Intent dated 24.4.2000<\/p>\n
which was a specific condition laid down in the letter of intent for<\/p>\n
issuance of allotment letter.\n<\/p>\n
              Instead of depositing 25% of the premium, the petitioner<\/p>\n
vide letter dated 19.7.2000, again        requested    the authorities to<\/p>\n
charge rate of land @ of Rs.130\/- per sq. yard instead of Rs.5800\/-<\/p>\n
per sq.yds. The request of the petitioner was rejected vide letter<\/p>\n
dated 4.1.2001(Annexure P-10) and petitioner was asked to deposit<\/p>\n
the price of the additional land. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an<\/p>\n
appeal before        the Advisor to the Administrator, U.T.Chandigarh,<\/p>\n
against order dated January 4, 2001, which was not accepted and<\/p>\n
the petitioner        was, accordingly,     informed vide letter dated<\/p>\n
6.11.2001 (Annexure P-13).          Aggrieved by the order of appellate<\/p>\n
authority, the petitioner filed CWP No. 1440 of 2002 before this<\/p>\n
Court, which was dismissed as withdrawn                vide order dated<\/p>\n
23.1.2002, which reads as under:\n<\/p>\n
                     “After arguing at length, in view of the fact that<\/p>\n
                     allotment of additional land would be subject matter<\/p>\n
                     of an independent transaction, learned counsel<\/p>\n
                     appearing on behalf of the petitioner prays for<\/p>\n
                     permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty<\/p>\n
                     to pursue such remedy as admissible in accordance<\/p>\n
                     with law for settlement of the price for allotment of
\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                                 [4]<\/p>\n
                     additional land.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                    Leave and liberty granted. The writ<\/p>\n
                     petitioner is dismissed as withdrawn.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
              The     petitioner     submitted    representations      to   the<\/p>\n
authorities for consideration of his claim but vide impugned order<\/p>\n
dated 18.7.2007 (Annexure P-15), the Letter of Intent issued to the<\/p>\n
petitioner in respect of allotment of additional land on lease hold<\/p>\n
basis was withdrawn on the ground that              the petitioner failed to<\/p>\n
deposit 25% of the premium within the stipulated period, which is a<\/p>\n
subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.<\/p>\n
              Mr. Chetan Mittal, learned Senior Counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner, has argued that initially the plot was allotted to the<\/p>\n
petitioner     in the year 1986 and         possession thereof      was also<\/p>\n
handed over but due to some mistake at the level of the respondents,<\/p>\n
the amended allotment letter was issued for land measuring 4.23<\/p>\n
kanals. In the amended letter of allotment, the price of additional<\/p>\n
land at the rate of Rs.5800\/- per sq. yd. was more than the initial rate<\/p>\n
of Rs.130\/- per sq. yd.            The mistake was not on the part of the<\/p>\n
petitioner but it was on the part of the respondents only. Mr. Mittal<\/p>\n
argued that the petitioner was neither given any opportunity of<\/p>\n
hearing nor any speaking order was passed and the letter of<\/p>\n
allotment was withdrawn in an arbitrary manner. Mr. Mittal further<\/p>\n
argued that the impugned                order has been passed without<\/p>\n
mentioning any reason and without any justification and, moreover,<\/p>\n
the petitioner was subsequently ready to deposit the amount even at<\/p>\n
the rate of Rs..5800\/- per sq. yard and a draft was also prepared
\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                             [5]<\/p>\n
which was not accepted by the respondents. Learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the petitioner also relied upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court<\/p>\n
reported in M.D.,HSIDC and others Vs M\/S Hari Om Enterprises<\/p>\n
and another JT 2008 (8) SC 184 that the petitioner is ready to<\/p>\n
deposit current price of the land in dispute and states that the delay<\/p>\n
was due to the action of the respondents only as the petitioner was<\/p>\n
entitled to deposit the price of the plot at the rate of Rs.130\/- per<\/p>\n
square yard, whereas the respondents were insisting the price of the<\/p>\n
additional land at the rate of Rs.5800\/- per.sq.yard. As an opportunity<\/p>\n
was also given to the petitioner to deposit the price of the plot at the<\/p>\n
rate of Rs.5800\/- per sq. yards, but the same was not deposited as<\/p>\n
the additional land was a part and parcel of the plot initially allotted<\/p>\n
to the Trust.\n<\/p>\n
              A short reply has been filed by the respondents which is<\/p>\n
on record.\n<\/p>\n
              Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to<\/p>\n
3, has argued that only a Letter of Intent was issued to the petitioner<\/p>\n
and no letter of allotment was issued. The petitioner was afforded<\/p>\n
ample     opportunity to deposit the amount but in spite of granting<\/p>\n
various opportunities, the amount of even 25%         which was to be<\/p>\n
deposited within a period of 30 days from the date of issuance of<\/p>\n
Letter of Intent, was not deposited.      It is clearly mentioned in the<\/p>\n
Letter of Intent that in the event of default of breach or non<\/p>\n
compliance of any of the conditions of lease, the land would         be<\/p>\n
cancelled and the site in dispute resumed. Since the petitioner had<\/p>\n
failed to deposit 25% of the premium within the stipulated period of<\/p>\n
30 days, the Letter of Intent issued to the petitioner was withdrawn
\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                               [6]<\/p>\n
as per terms and conditions of Letter of Intent.\n<\/p>\n
              We have heard arguments of learned counsel for parties<\/p>\n
and have perused writ records.\n<\/p>\n
              It is an admitted case that petitioner has not deposited<\/p>\n
25% of the earnest money within the stipulated period of 30 days<\/p>\n
and the withdrawal of Letter of Intent was as per terms and<\/p>\n
conditions mentioned therein. The relevant portion of the terms and<\/p>\n
conditions of Letter of Intent is reproduced as under:<\/p>\n
                     “………….In the event of default, breach or non-<\/p>\n
       compliance of any of the conditions of lease, the lease may be<\/p>\n
       cancelled and the site resumed and the whole\/part amount paid<\/p>\n
       to the Government towards the premium\/rent of the site may be<\/p>\n
       forfeited to Govt………”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              It is clear from the documents on record that various<\/p>\n
opportunities were granted to the petitioner to deposit the said<\/p>\n
amount but, in spite of that, the amount was not deposited. The<\/p>\n
balance amount was to be deposited after issuance of allotment<\/p>\n
letter as only the Letter of Intent was issued and the allotment letter<\/p>\n
was to be issued on deposit of 25% of the premium.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
              The petitioner has not complied with the terms and<\/p>\n
conditions laid down in Letter of Intent dated 24.4.2000 and the same<\/p>\n
was withdrawn on account of failure on the part of the petitioner -trust<\/p>\n
to deposit 25% of the premium within the stipulated period. The<\/p>\n
petitioner-trust did not deposit the amount on the ground that the<\/p>\n
additional land was a part and parcel of the plot already allotted to<\/p>\n
the trust and due to mistake on the part of the respondents, that land<\/p>\n
was not allotted and the amount was deposited of the land which was
\n Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008                               [7]<\/p>\n
not disputed. When this mistake came to the notice, the petitioner<\/p>\n
immediately submitted application and requested to allot additional<\/p>\n
land on the same rate and the respondents considered this land as<\/p>\n
additional land and not part and parcel of the previous plot already<\/p>\n
allotted to the trust.\n<\/p>\n
               The dispute is whether the land in dispute is a part and<\/p>\n
parcel of the initial plot allotted to the petitioner-trust or it was an<\/p>\n
additional land. Since the land is a part of that plot only which was<\/p>\n
allotted to the petitioner-trust but the same could not be allotted as<\/p>\n
the same was not found in record and this mistake came to the<\/p>\n
notice of the authorities later. The submission of learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the petitioner seems to be genuine as land in dispute is adjacent to<\/p>\n
the land already allotted to the trust and, initially also, it was a part<\/p>\n
and parcel of the same plot which was allotted to the petitioner. The<\/p>\n
petitioner is ready to deposit current price of the plot in view of the<\/p>\n
judgment of Hon’ble the Apex Court in M.D.,HSIDC’s case (supra).<\/p>\n
              In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it<\/p>\n
proper     to direct the respondents to re-consider the claim of the<\/p>\n
petitioner-trust in the light of the observations made by Hon’ble the<\/p>\n
Apex Court in the afore-cited judgment if the petitioner-trust is ready<\/p>\n
to deposit the current price of the land in dispute along with interest<\/p>\n
and penal interest.\n<\/p>\n
              This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
 (UMA NATH SINGH)                          (DAYA CHAUDHARY)\n     JUDGE                                      JUDGE\n\n4.11.2008.\nraghav\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008 Civil Writ Petition 9367 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.9367 of 2008 Date of decision: 4.11.2008 World Renewal Spiritual Trust through its Branch Manager, Brahma Kumar Amir Chand. ….Petitioner. […]<\/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-255550","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nWorld Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 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\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"World Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-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=\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-14T01:51:20+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-14T01:51:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1777,\"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\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\",\"name\":\"World Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-14T01:51:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 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":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 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\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-14T01:51:20+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-14T01:51:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008"},"wordCount":1777,"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\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008","name":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust ... vs Union Territory on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-14T01:51:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/world-renewal-spiritual-trust-vs-union-territory-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"World Renewal Spiritual Trust … vs Union Territory on 4 November, 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\/255550","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=255550"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255550\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255550"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255550"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255550"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}