Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-01-2006
Reported in : II(2007)ACC872; (2006)144PLR344
Viney Mittal, J. 1. This judgment shall dispose of three first appeals being FAO No. 955 of 1996, FAO No. 956 of 1996 and FAO No. 958 of 1996 as all three appeals have been filed against the common award dated July 31,1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat (for short, `the Tribunal'). 2. The appellants are the injured claimants. They have approached this Court for enhancement of compensation. 3. An accident took place on January 22,1991. There was a head on collision between Bus No. HYU 6691 owned by the Haryana Roadways and truck No. HRD 6715 owned by Om Parkash and driven by Harbans Lal, driver, who also died in the aforesaid accident. The aforesaid truck was insured with National Insurance Company. Anil Kumar, Ashok Kumar and Raj Kumar alias Raju were three persons who were travelling in the bus and received injuries on account of the aforesaid accident. On account of injuries suffered by them, they filed a separate claim petitions before the Motor Accidents Cla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-01-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR320
..... to the real owner and amounted to denial of title of true owner. in case of permissive possession, the person who is in possession, must allege and prove some overt act. 15. faced with the above legal position, learned counsel for the appellants contended that by obtaining electricity, water and sewerage connections in her name and the names of her family ..... title to the true owner, his possession cannot be adverse to the true owner. a. person inducted as licencee must continue to be regarded as licencee until by some overt act he disclaims. it has been held in m.v.s. manikayala rao v. m. narasimhaswami and ors. a.i.r. 1996 s.c. 470 that the question of adverse possession .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-02-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR353
Jasbir Singh, J.1. Respondent No. 1 field suit for recovery of disputed amount against respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. Vide order, under challenge, his application, under Order 6 Rule 17 of CPC was allowed and the petitioner was allowed to be added as one of the defendants.3. It is apparent from the records that when originally, written statement was filed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in the suit, they took a specific objection that for non-joinder of necessary party i.e. the petitioner, the suit be dismissed. Despite that, respondent No. 1 continued with his suit, led his evidence and also allowed respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to complete their evidence. He moved application for amendment, as referred to above, . only on 18.11.2004, after about more than six years of filing of the suit, which, this Court feels has wrongly been allowed by the court below, vide order, under challenge.4. Perusal of the record indicates that when written statement was filed by respondent Nos. 2 and 3, it was brought t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-03-2006
Reported in : I(2006)DMC761; (2006)144PLR582
..... in the interest of justice to close the chapter between the parties. hence, this petition succeeds. a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent in terms of section 13-b of the act, dissolving the marriage between the parties is hereby passed. decree sheet be prepared accordingly.7. f.a.o. no. 11-m of 1998 shall also be ..... to part their matrimonial ways and for that they have prayed for dissolution of this marriage by passing a decree of divorce by mutual consent in terms of section 13-b of the act.6. the parties are fighting this matrimonial dispute since 1992 and now it appears that good sense has prevailed upon them and i am also of the ..... been moved.4. taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of this case, the same is allowed. the parties have also filed a joint petition under section 13-b of the act, wherein it has been stated that they are living separately from each other since october 1,1978 and could not reconcile due to their temperamental differences. further, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-10-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR414
Hemant Gupta, J. 1. The defendants are in revision petition aggrieved against the order passed by the learned trial Court on 19.5.2004, whereby the amendment sought in the written statement was declined.2. The estate of one Parkash Kaur is in dispute She died on 16.12.1980 leaving behind her husband Balwant Singh, son Baljit Singh and daughters Narinder Kaur and Salwinder Kaur. Mutation of estate of Parkash Kaur was sanctioned in favour of her husband Balwant Singh allegedly on the basis of Will dated 21.11.1980. Though the said order of sanction of the mutation was set aside in appeal but Balwant Singh has suffered a consent decree in favour of his son Baljit Singh. One of the daughters i.e., Narinder Kaur, has filed the present suit for joint possession claiming l/4th share of the suit property. In the said suit Balwant Singh and Baljit Singh were impleaded as defendants. Even before filing of the written statement, Balwant Singh died. In the written statement, filed by Baljit Singh,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-17-2006
Reported in : I(2006)DMC785
..... is in the interest of justice, if petition, titled as smt. kamal nain v. sumit kutnar, under section 9 of the hindu marriage act pending in the court of ms. sunita kumari, civil judge (senior division), ferozepur is transferred to the learned district judge, chandigarh. it shall be open ..... thereafter, the respondent has filed the present petition under section 9 of the hindu marriage act.3. keeping in view the undisputed fact that the husband is residing at mohali which is at a small distance from chandigarh. therefore, it ..... mohali to lodge an fir against the respondent and his mother and brother. it has been further pointed out that the respondent filed a petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and dissolution, at ferozepur but the said petition was withdrawn on 25.1.2005. soon .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-20-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR200
..... for the delay taken due to the pendency of the appeal or revision before the appellate or revisional court as the case may be. the provisions of section 15(2) of the act which envisages the stay of further proceedings in the matter pending decision on an appeal; though it is not specifically provided for security for due performance of ..... the hon'ble supreme court. even otherwise, it is appropriate to note that the petition by the tenants in these cases have been filed in terms of section 15(5) of the act which reads as under:-the high court may, at any time on the application of any aggrieved party or on its own motion, call for and examine ..... the rent controller on 3.10.1996. the appellate authority held that the premises were required by the landlord for his personal use. accordingly, the petition filed under section 13 of the act was accepted and the order of the rent controller was set aside by the appellate authority on 5.11.2001. accordingly, the ejectment of the tenant was ordered. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-22-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR315
..... dated june 15, 1989. a period of almost 9 months had passed from the date of the sale till the date of issuance of notification under section 4 of the act. there must have been an increase in prices of the land in the intervening period. the aforesaid increase should be taken to be the balancing factor, ..... was awarded for the entire land. the claimant-land owners remained dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation. claiming that the compensation was inadequate, they sought references under section 18 of the act, the matter was duly referred.4. before the reference court, the partied led their evidence. the claimants appeared as their own witnesses in support of their ..... 13 marlas of land was intended to be acquired for the construction of a bus stand at bhuna, tehsil fatehabad, the then district hisar. a notification under section 6 of the act was issued on october 26, 1990. the land acquisition collector rendered his award dated december 6, 1991. a uniform compensation at the rate of rs. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-22-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR691
..... constructions : 2001(6)ald191 , it was held:the decision of the apex court in m/s guru nanak foundation (supra) was under the old act. section 31(4) of 1940 act in the said decision was construed holding that where arbitrator has been appointed by the supreme court, it would have jurisdiction to entertain the award and it ..... has the jurisdiction to entertain an application for notification of the award and it could only be the principal civil court of original jurisdiction as contemplated under section 2(e) of the act, therefore, in our opinion, this application is not maintainable before this court.23. thus, i conclude that the objections filed before this court are ..... the parties. it was during the course of hearing before this court, the parties decided to submit to the jurisdiction of an arbitrator. in terms of section 42 of the act, that court alone shall have the jurisdiction where any application has been made with respect to the arbitration agreement.19. in p. anand gajapathi raju's .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-22-2006
Reported in : II(2007)BC647; (2006)143PLR323
..... onus of proving is always upon the person pleading the agreement contrary to the general rule or the terms of the decree schedule. the provisions of sections 59 to 61 of the contract act are applicable in cases where a debtor owes several distinct debts to one person and do not deal with cases in which the principal and interest are ..... provisions of order xxi rules 1 and 2, order xxx vll rules 1 and 2 of the code alongwith sections 59 to 61 of the contract act, 1872. in order xxi rule 1 of the code, the mode of paying (sic) amount has been provided and the payment made to the decree holder ..... that the impugned order dated 19.2.2002 passed by the executing court does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this court in exercise of jurisdiction under section 115 of the code. in the case of industrial credit and development syndicate v. smithaben h. patel : [1999]1scr555 , the hon'ble supreme court has considered the .....
Tag this Judgment!