Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2004CriLJ2329
ORDERNirmal Singh, J.1. The relevant facts for disposal of this petition are that Resham Singh was married to petitioner No. 1, Parminder Kaur. In the year 1989, the police of Police Station, Rahon, took Resham Singh in their custody from his house and had taken him to an unknown place, suspected him to be a terrorist involved in terrorist activities. Petitioner No. 1 alongwith his entire family, relatives and friends made their best efforts to locate and to get Resham Singh released from the police but they could, not succeed and his whereabouts were not known. The police had also not disclosed his arrest, detention or elimination by fake or genuine encounter. He has never met petitioner No. 1 or any other relative or friend. Therefore, Resham Singh is presumed to be dead as he is unheard for the last more than 7 years i.e. since 1989.2. Petitioner No. 1, keeping in view her own well being and better comfort of life and independent decision and without any pressure is now living with ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2004CriLJ2156
ORDERSatish Kumar Mittal, J. 1. The petitioner, who is the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Rampur, has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for direction to the respondents to remove his name from the Surveillance Register No. 10 maintained under Rule 23.4 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and the history sheet of the petitioner opened in pursuance of entry in the above-said register under Rule 23.9 of the Rules.2. It has been alleged in the petition that after his retirement from the Punjab Armed Police on 9-5-1966, he started doing agriculture work in the village. It has also been alleged that he remained Member Panchayat for nine years and now he is the Sarpanch of village Gram Panchayat. It has been further alleged that he has also been the Member of District Congress Committee. The petitioner further alleged that the police of Police Station, Qadian has illegally entered his name in the Surveillance Register No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2004(2)ARBLR241(P& H); (2004)137PLR12; [2004]52SCL429(Punj& Har)
H.S. Bedi, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 14.3.2003 whereby the writ petition challenging the order of the Company Law Board dated 8.12.2000, copy appended as Annexure P-1 has been dismissed. The facts of the case which have been largely taken from the writ petition are as under:-Lala Jagat Narain, the father-in-law of petitioner No. 1 and grandfather of the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 founded the Company known as the Hind Samachar Limited in the year 1949. Its main object was the printing and publishing of newspapers, journals, magazines etc. It is the legacy of Lala Jagat Narain and the Company, which he founded, which is the bone of contention in this bitter family feud. Lala Jagat Narain was shot and killed by terrorists on 9.9.1981 an event which signalled the onset of terrorism in the Punjab. After his death, his son Ramesh Chander, husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 took ov...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : III(2004)BC220; (2004)137PLR633
Virender Singh, J.1. Mahesh Inder Singh, the petitioner herein, stands convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Phagwara vide impugned judgment dated 07.02.1989 under Section 420/468 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 420 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for one month; to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 468 IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo further RI for one month. However, both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, he preferred an appeal and the same also stands dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 12.07.1989 of learned additional sessions Judge, Kapurthala. Hence, this revision.2. It is worth-mentioning here that one Surjit Kaur wife of Kashmir Singh, resident of Mattalu, Tehsil Phillaur, District Jalandhar was also booked along with the present petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [2004]55SCL92(Punj& Har)
Hemant Gupta, J.1. This order shall dispose of C.A. Nos. 881 and 845 of 2002.2. M/s. Northland Sugar Complex Ltd. was a company incorporated and registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') having its registered office at Village Randhawa (Dasuya), District Hoshiarpur. The said company was ordered to be wound up on 9-10-1997 vide order passed in C.P. No. 45 of 1996. Before the order of winding up was passed, the applicant-bank claimed that the securities charged to the consortium of Banks as a secured creditors cannot be sold or disposed of in any manner. This Court while passing the order of winding up ordered that the assets and securities charged to the consortium of banks shall be out of the winding up proceedings. It was held to the following effect :'As regards the objection raised by Mr. Narang, it is directed that the eonsortiurn of Banks shall give details to the Official Liquidator of the assets and securities charged to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)191CTR(P& H)111; [2004]268ITR97(P& H)
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.1. This is a petition for leave to appeal filed by the Revenue against the order dated February 26, 2003, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court'), by which he acquitted non-petitioners--M/s. Gagneja Traders and its partners--Shri Joginder Pal, and Smt. Sheila Devi in Criminal Case No. 683/02 of 2002 registered on the basis of the complaint filed by the petitioner under Sections 276C and 277 read with Section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), with regard to the assessment year 1988-89.2. Non-petitioner No. 1 is a registered firm and is deriving income from purchase and sale of gur and sugar. Non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 were partners in non-petitioner No. 1 having equal shares. For the assessment year 1988-89, the return of income was filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 on August 29, 1988, declaring an income of Rs. 38,584, The assessment was completed on December 28, 1988. Non-petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)137PLR348
G.S. Singhvi, J1. These petitions are directed against order dated 11.10.1983 passed by Financial Commissioner, Appeals, Punjab (respondent No. 1) vide which he allowed the revision petitions filed by Shri Bhagat Singh (respondent), who died during the pendency of the litigation and is represented by his legal representatives, under Section 24 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short, 'the Act') and declared that he is entitled to purchase the land under his tenancy.2. The petitioner owns land in village Daulatpur, Tehsil arid District Jalandhar. Late Shri Bhagat Singh was inducted as tenant on a portion of the land measuring 46 kanals and 16 marlas comprised in khasra Nos. 155, 156, 157, 158, 162 and 163. On 13.6.1967, an application was filed on behalf of the petitioner under Section 14-A(i) read with Section 9(2) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (for short, 'the Act') for ejectment of Shri Bhagat Singh on the ground that he had failed to pay rent f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)137PLR547
K.C. Gupta, J. 1. This appeal has been instituted by the defendant, Smt. Jamuna Devi, against judgment dated 8.5.1990 passed by Additional District Judge, Faridabad, whereby he set aside the judgment and order dated 4.8.1988 passed by Sub Judge IInd Class, Faridabad, in favour of the appellant and allowed the claim of the respondent-plaintiff and decree for possession in respect of the suit land was passed against the appellant.2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the respondent-plaintiff, Smt. Sarbati Devi, and her brother, Suraj Bhan were owners in possession in equal shares of the agriculture land measuring 78 Kanals 13 Marlas situated in revenue estate of Village Ladholi, Tehsil Ballabgarh, district Faridabad. Suraj Bhan had filed a civil suit against the respondent for declaration to the fact that he be declared as owner of the share of the respondent in the suit land as the respondent had agreed to part with the share by mutual consent. The said suit was decreed in favour of Sur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)137PLR746
Viney Mittal, J.1. The defendant-Municipality, Thanesar has approached this Court through the appeal.2. The plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction. It was claimed that he along with others were owner in possession of the land as detailed in the plaint. In the aforesaid land, the Municipal Committee has no right, title or interest. The defendant-committee had served a notice upon the plaintiff under Sections 208/209 of the Haryana Municipal Act, 1973 claiming that the plaintiff had raised construction without the prior permission of the defendant-Committee and as such the same was liable to be removed. It was claimed that the aforesaid notice was without jurisdiction and the construction was more than two years old on the date of the notice.3. The defendant-Municipal Committee contested the suit. It was claimed that Khasra No. 204/7 is owned and possessed by the Municipal Committee and it had installed a tubewell therein. It was claimed that near Khasra 'No. 204/7 unauthorised ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)137PLR393
V.K. Bali, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the defendants. The suit filed by plaintiffs Smt. Dalbir Kaur and other under Section 77 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 for a decree directing the District Registrar and Sub Registrar, Tehsil Amritsar, for registration of sale deed dated 16.10.1975 executed by defendant No. 1, in favour of the plaintiffs for consideration of Rs. 43837.50, was decreed by learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Amritsar vide judgment and decree dated 30.7.1979.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal, as culled out from the pleadings of the parties, reveal that plaintiffs 2 and 3 being minors filed a suit through their father, natural guardian, against Sukhbir Singh, arrayed as defendant No. 1 in the original suit, who died during the pendency of the lis and his name was substituted by his legal representatives, brought on record as 1(a) to 1(g). It was case of plaintiffs that on 16.10.1975, defendant No. 1 had executed sale deed on the requisite stamp pa...
Tag this Judgment!