Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1995J& K99
S.C. Mathur, C.J. 1. This is plaintiff's first-appeal arising from a suit for recovery of loan. While decreeing the appellant's suit for recovery of Rs. 1,06,103.03 with costs against the respondents, the learned single Judge gave two directions : (1) that the decretal amount shall be liquidated within a period of six years with minimum instalments of Rs. 1500 -each, and (2) that the decretal amount shall carry pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The contractual rate of interest was 11%. The appellant-Hank was aggrieved with both the directions. It accordingly preferred the instant appeal which was filed on 15-5-1987. Despite service no one appeared on behalf of the respondents.2. The period of six years mentioned hereinabove has already expired and therefore the challenge directed in the present appeal against the first direction has become infructuous. The challenge against the second direction survives.3. Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1977(B) ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
S.C. Mathur, C.J.1. A single individual, Sukesh Chander Khajuria, has filed this writ petition seeking ban on private medical practice by doctors in the service of the State Government and for creation and assurance of proper, adequate and hygienic medical facilities for the citizens of the State. The petition has been claimed to have been filed in public interest. The petitioner has claimed himself to be a social activist and President or member of several social organisations. A few facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition may be stated:2. Government doctors likely to be affected by the petition fall in two categories: (1) those posted at Primary Health Centres and Hospitals; (2) the posted at institutions imparting medical education . Doctors belonging to the second category are governed by Jammu and Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Rules, 1879. Said doctors along with other Government servants are governed by Jammu and Kashmir Public Men and Public Servants...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
ORDERV.K. Gupta, J. 1. Mr. S.P. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents Sat Paul & others submits that the application for setting aside the award is time barred. According to him, the period of 30 days of limitation commences from the date the parties have the notice of the announcement of the award. Mr. Gupta's submission is that the notice of the filing of the award from the court is immaterial and that if a party has the notice of the passing of the award and he waits for the award to be filed in the court, receive the notice of the filing of the award from the court and then files an application within 30 days thereafter, the application shall be deemed to be time barred. In support of his contention, he has relied upon a judgment of the apex court in the case of Indian Rayon Corporation Ltd. v. Raunaq and Co. Pvt. Ltd. reported in AIR 1988 SC 2054.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties I hold that the contention of Mr. Gupta is not correct. The plain me...
Tag this Judgment!