*** Vs. V.

*** vs V.

Type Court Judgment Court Punjab and Haryana Decided Aug 30, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1044380

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1044380
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On: Aug 30, 2013

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

***

Respondent

AI Legal Summary

Get an instant AI-powered legal breakdown - case summary, ratio decidendi, key issues, and more.

Excerpt

.....the judgment should be reported in the digest ?. *** ajay tewari, j (oral) by this writ petition, the petitioner-corporation has challenged the order dated 2.9.1997 (annexure p-6) passed by the labour court directing refund of ` 6992/- along with interest @ 18% p.a, which was debited from the salary account of respondent no.2. counsel for respondent no.2 states that since no stay was granted by this court, repayment was made and that respondent no.2 has not retired on 30.11.2002. counsel for the petitioner has fairly stated that in that event, he would not press this writ petition provided the exorbitant interest @ 18% kumar kishan 2013.08.31 10:36 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document high court chandigarh c.w.p no.18378 of 1997 ::2:: awarded by the labour court is reduced. in view of the fair stand taken by counsel for the petitioner, counsel for respondent no.2 has also accepted that he would not oppose the prayer of the petitioner. in the circumstances, i reduce the interest from 18% pa to 10% pa. with this modification, the order of the labour court is upheld and the writ petition is disposed of. ( ajay tewari ) august 30, 2013. judge `kk' kumar kishan.....

Full Judgment

C.W.P No.18378 of 1997 ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P No.18378 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision : August 30, 2013 Haryana State Co-op Supply & Marketing Federation Limited, .....Petitioner v.

The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Hisar & another, .....Respondent *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr.Amit Jaswal, Advocate for Mr.B.R Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Sandeep Punchhi, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*** 1.

Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ?.”

2. To be referred to the Reporters or No.?.”

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?.

*** AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral) By this writ petition, the petitioner-Corporation has challenged the order dated 2.9.1997 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Labour Court directing refund of ` 6992/- along with interest @ 18% p.a, which was debited from the salary account of respondent No.2.

Counsel for respondent No.2 states that since no stay was granted by this Court, repayment was made and that respondent No.2 has not retired on 30.11.2002.

Counsel for the petitioner has fairly stated that in that event, he would not press this writ petition provided the exorbitant interest @ 18% Kumar Kishan 2013.08.31 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh C.W.P No.18378 of 1997 ::2:: awarded by the Labour Court is reduced.

In view of the fair stand taken by counsel for the petitioner, counsel for respondent No.2 has also accepted that he would not oppose the prayer of the petitioner.

In the circumstances, I reduce the interest from 18% pa to 10% pa.

With this modification, the order of the Labour Court is upheld and the writ petition is disposed of.

( AJAY TEWARI ) August 30, 2013.

JUDGE `kk' Kumar Kishan 2013.08.31 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh