Shortfall In Land Area Not A Defect In Title: HP High Court Quashes HIMUDA's Order Withholding Payment Of Landowners

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has quashed a communication issued by the Himachal Pradesh Housing and Urban Development Authority , which had withheld payment of to the landowners on the ground that a shortfall in the land area could not be treated as a defect in title under the sale deed.Justice Ajay Mohan Goel said: “This Court is of the considered view that defect in title of land cannot be confused with the alleged shortfall in the total land sold by the petitioners to the respondent.”In 2017, the petitioners, Sachin Shridhar had sold 570 bighas of land in District Sirmaur, to Himachal Pradesh Housing and Urban Development Authority. Thereafter a sale deed was executed between the parties. It has been alleged by the petitioners that a substantial part of the sale consideration has not been paid to them, as HIMUDA claimed that the area handed over was short by 60–70 bighas. The petitioner contended that the so called alleged shortfall cannot be termed as a defect in the title of land. Further, the petitioner had submitted demarcation reports, and possession of the entire land was duly handed over to HIMUDA.In response, HIMUDA contended that it was the duty of the petitioners to ensure complete demarcation of the land. However, this was not done by the petitioners which violated clause 4 and 5 of the sale deed, so the board was right in withholding the balance payment. The High Court reiterated that HIMUDA misinterpreted clause 4 and 5 of the sale deed as those clauses were meant to cover situations where the title itself was defective not cases involving a variation in measurement.Further, the High Court noted that HIMUDA itself acknowledged full possession of the land when sale took place. Also, Clause 1 of the sale deed clearly recorded delivery of vacant and peaceful possession of land to HIMUDA. Thus, the Court directed HIMUDA to release all payment to the landowners. Case Name: Sachin Shridhar & others v/s Himachal Pradesh Housing & Urban Development AuthorityCase No.: CWP No.1262 of 2020Date of Decision: 27.10.2025For the petitioners: Mr.Suneet Goel, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Vivek Negi, AdvocateFor the Respondent: Mr.Roop Lal, Advocate vice Mr. Jeevesh Sharma, AdvocateClick Here To Read/Download Order

Shortfall In Land Area Not A Defect In Title: HP High Court Quashes HIMUDA's Order Withholding Payment Of Landowners

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags