Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-09-2006
Reported in : (2006)142PLR624
Satish Kumar Mittal, J.1. The defendant Raj Kumar has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the Orders dated 18.10.2002 vide which his defence was struck off because of non-filing of the written statement within the time granted and dated 24.12.2003 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Karnal vide which his application for recalling the said order has been dismissed.2. In the suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by respondent No. l, the petitioner was served through Munadi on 19.9.2002. On that date, he appeared through his Advocate and the case was adjourned for 11.10.2002 for filing of the written statement. On that date, written statement was not filed on behalf of the petitioner and on request the case was again adjourned for 16.10.2002 for filing the written statement. On that date, again a request was made for filing the written statement and the case was adjourned for 18.10.2002 for the said purpose and last oppo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-09-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR95a
Hemant Gupta, J.1. The plaintiff is in revision aggrieved against the order passed by the learned trial Court on 20.11.2003, whereby his application for reframing of the issues was declined.2. The plaintiff has filed a suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recovery of Rs. 5,35,000/- i.e. Rs. 5 lacs as principal amount advanced as loan and Rs. 35,000/- as interest, on the basis or two cheques issues by the plaintiff to the defendants.3. It is the case of the defendants that the said amount was received not as a loan but' a security which attracts interest @ 12%. On the basis of the pleadings, the trial Court has re-framed the issues, which read as under:-1. Whether the defendants took loan of Rs. 5 lacs from the plaintiff, as alleged? OPP2. Whether the defendants agreed to pay interest @ 18% per annum as alleged? OPP3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the recovery of Rs. 5,35,000/- as alleged? OPP4. If issue No. 3 is proved, whether the plaintiff is entitled to get ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2006
Reported in : 2006CriLJ1386; 2006FAJ246
..... be gainsaying that the petitioners have been deprived of their valuable right to have the sample re-analysed from the central drugs laboratory under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the act. the petitioners could not notify to the inspector or the court within 28 days of the receipt of the report that they intended to ..... state of punjab v. national organic chemical industries ltd. : (1996)11scc613 this court in somewhat similar circumstances said that the procedure laid down under section 24 of the act deprived the accused to have sample tested by the central insecticides laboratory and adduced evidence of the report so given in his defence. this court stressed the ..... are alleged to have been denied the valuable right of having the sample re-analysed from the central insecticides laboratory as directed under the provisions of section 24(4) of the act.3. after issuance of the notice of the petition, the insecticides inspector submitted his reply. in the reply it is stated that the petitioners .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR19a
..... and subsequently acquired canadian nationality. in view thereof, the respondents are non resident indians and, therefore, entitled to seek eviction of the tenant in terms of section 13-b of the act.7. sarwan singh is admitted to be the landlord by the petitioner in the written statement. the requirement of both the respondents is pleaded. the said ..... the owner of the property in dispute for the last more than five years and, thus, pre-requisite condition to seek eviction under the provisions of section 13-b of the act is satisfied.5. in the present revision petition, aggrieved against the said judgment, it has been argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the ..... was let out by sarwan singh alone. it was alleged that the respondents arc not non resident indians and, therefore, not covered under the provisions of section 13-b of the act to seek eviction in a summary manner.4. leave to defend the application was allowed by the learned rent controller. after recording of evidence and its .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR352
..... fee on the plaint. the learned trial court dismissed the said application while observing that case of the plaintiff falls within the provisions of section 7(iv)(c) read with section 7(v)(b) of the court fees. act, 1870 and the plaintiff is required to affix the court fee ten times the land revenue assessed in respect of the land in question .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2006
Reported in : IV(2006)BC492; 2007(1)CTLJ251(P& H); (2006)142PLR537
D.K. Jain, C.J.1. By this writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner questions the legality and validity of the decision taken by the officials of the Northern Railway, respondents No. 2 to 5 herein, to award limited advertising rights in three parks, in the circulating area of Chandigarh Railway Station, in favour of respondent No. 6.2. Briefly stated, the background facts are as follows:The petitioner, a sole proprietary concern, is engaged in the business of outdoor advertising in and around the city of Chandigarh. The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt., respondent No. 3 herein, had awarded to the petitioner the work of development and maintenance of three parks of Chandigarh Railway Station and in consideration therefor, it was entitled to display 14 Glow Sign Boards of different sizes for a period of 3 years. On the expiry of the said period, respondent No. 3 issued a fresh notice inviting tenders (for ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2006
Reported in : (2006)142PLR518
..... candidate in applying for admission and/or in appearing in an entrance test, (for admission against the 85% state quota seats for the mbbs course), constitutes an act, of having obtained the benefit of residence in such state.11. the aforesaid issue may be examined on the basis of a hypothetical illustration (derivable from the ..... are satisfied, that while adjudicating the controversy raised in manisha bonsai's case (supra), this court did not have the occasion to examine, whether or not, the act of a candidate in applying for or appearing in an entrance test conducted by another state, would per-se amount to having availed the benefit of residence in ..... recognized dental colleges of haryana.2. for children of employees of haryana govt./pensioners of haryana govt./ employees of statutory bodies/corporations established by or under an act of the state of haryana, certificate to this effect issued by head of the office.3. for all other candidates:-a domicile certificate issued by the district .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-11-2006
Reported in : (2006)142PLR870
..... . it has also been found that even if the building was let out for non-residential purpose without obtaining permission from the rent controller under section 11 of the act, the demised premises will continue to be a residential building and the landlord will be entitled to seek eviction for the purpose of bonafide requirement. ..... 300/-. the petitioner is running a small scale industry in the demised premises. in the year 1996, the respondent-landlord filed the ejectment application under section 13 of the act for eviction of the petitioner from the demised premises on the grounds of non-payment of rent and personal necessity of his family. the family of ..... satish kumar mittal, j. 1. petitioner mohan lal aggarwal (tenant) has filed this revision petition under section 15(5) of the east punjab urban rent restriction act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') against the orders 24.5.2000 and 18.10.2005 passed by the rent controller and the appellate authority respectively ordering his .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-11-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR407
..... of filing of the suit land, therefore, the mere suit for declaration without claiming the consequential relief of possession was not maintainable in view of the provision of section 34 of the specific relief act, 1963 which reads as under:34. discretion of court as to declaration of status of right.- any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right ..... declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to do so.7. a perusal of the proviso to section 34 of the specific relief act, 1963 clearly lays down that where the plaintiff has not sought the consequential relief of possession in a suit for declaration then such a declaration shall not be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-11-2006
Reported in : (2006)143PLR68
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution prays for quashing order dated 7.5.2005 passed by the trial Court dismissing the application of the defendant-petitioner for amendment of the written statement preferred under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the Code').2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent field Civil Suit No. 127 dated 20.5.1997 for possession of the land as detailed in the head note of the plaint by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 11.11.1996. After completion of pleadings and framing of issues the plaintiff-respondent proceeded with his evidence and concluded the same. At the stage when the case was fixed for evidence of the defendant-petitioner an application for amendment of the written statement under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code was filed. The plaintiff-respondent contested the application and the same was dismissed by the trial Court vide order dated 7.5.200...
Tag this Judgment!