IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.266 of 2008 Date of decision: January 30, 2009. Mrs. Tripta Bhaskar ...Petitioner(s) v. Haryana Urban Development Authority & Anr. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri N.D. Achint, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Nara, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner seeks quashing of a letter dated 18.7.2007 (Annexure P-11) whereby the transfer of plot No.1568, Sector 21, Gurgaon in her favour, has been declined by the HUDA authorities. The admitted facts are that the above stated plot was allotted in favour of Pramod Kumar and his wife Smt. Ram Ratti. They paid all the installments by the end of year 1991. The plot is free from all incumbrances. Pramod Kumar and Ram Ratti sold the said plot to Vijay Kumar Bhaskar, who had submitted all the requisite documents with the HUDA authorities for getting transferred the same in his favour. However, before the needful could be done, Vijay Kumar Bhaskar unfortunately expired in December, 2005. The petitioner is the widow of Vijay Kumar Bhaskar and is running from pillar to post to get the plot transferred in her name. The same having been denied vide the impugned letter, she has approached this Court. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the HUDA authorities have filed their counter affidavit. After arguing the case for some time, Learned Counsel for the Respondents has taken a fair stand that though the plot cannot be transferred in favour of the petitioner, however, a conveyance deed can be executed in her favour for the precise reason that all the dues have been cleared way back in the year 1991. According to him, the petitioner is liable to pay the stamp-duty charges for execution of the conveyance deed. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has no objection to the afore-stated procedure to be followed. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed to the extent that the respondents are directed to execute the conveyance deed of the above mentioned plot in favour of the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order subject, however, to the payment of requisite stamp duty charges by her. January 30, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge