RAJ CHOPRA Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgments. The auction-sale in favour of the appellant auction- purchaser was set aside on the ground of non-compliance with Sections 81 (1) and 83 (1) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act. Both the courts below concurrently held that the substituted service was vitiated because of non- compliance with the mandatory provisions contained in Sections 81 (1) and 81 (3) of the Punjab Land Revenue Act.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant auction-purchaser was unable to persuade us to hold that the substituted service was good. There is no substance in this appeal. The appeal to stand dismissed. However, in the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.