Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.8291 of 1994. 1 HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH. *** CWP No.8291 of 1994. Date of decision: September, 2013. *** M/S Nu-Tech Solvex ...Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others. ...Respondents *** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON. *** 1. Whether the Judgment be reported?.2. Whether the judgment be shown to the reporter.3. Whether a copy of the judgment be given to the reporter. Present: Shri Rajiv Agnihotri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rajiv Kwatra, Sr. D.A.G. Haryana, for the Respondents. *** DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON, J1 By way of this petition, writ in the nature of certiorari is sought by the petitioner for setting aside order dated 28.4.1994 (Annexure P-7) vide which appeal of the petitioner was dismissed and consequently benefit of sales tax exemption under the provisions of the Haryana General Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Rules.) was denied to the petitioner. CWP No....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2008)150PLR439
Hemant Gupta, J.1. The petitioner is a former Judge of this Court, now represented by his wife andhter. The challenge in the present writ petition is to declare the proviso to Para 2 (b) of Part III of the First Schedule of the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service Act), 1954 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') which fixes the maximum limit of pension of a retired Judge of a High Court, as ultra vires Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India being arbitrary and discriminatory. 2. The petitioner joined Punjab Civil Services (Judicial) on 25.4.1951. He was promoted as Additional District Judge on 12.11.1969 and elevated as a Judge of this Court on 2.2.1983. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 15.10.1987. 3. The case of the petitioner is that Para 2 (b) of Part III of First Schedule of the Act provides for special additional pension of Rs. 1600/-per annum in respect of each completed year of service for pension but maximum limit is Rs. 8000/-per annum. Apa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2004)138PLR126
Hemant Gupta, J.1. The plaintiff is in revision petition against the order passed by the learned trial Court whereby the defendant-respondent was permitted to amend the written statement filed by his mother Mukhtiar Kaur.2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he is the owner in possession of l/3rd share of suit land against his mother. Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur filed written statement admitting the claim of the plaintiff but before the Court could pass a decree on the basis of such admission, Smt. Mukhtiar Kaur died. The respondent herein is his son impleaded as her legal representative who filed an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for withdrawing the admission written statement filed on behalf of Mukhtiar Kaur alleging therein that the plaintiff has manipulated admission of defendant fraudulently and against the interest of Mukhtiar Kaur. It was also alleged that Mukhtiar Kaur could not make this admission and such admissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1965P& H270
A.N. Grover, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for the production of the body of Parkash Chandra who is at present being detained under S. 3(1)(a)(I) of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (hereinafter called the Act) in the Central Jail at Tehar and for direction that he be set at liberty.(2) The petitioner became an Associated Chartered Accountant in the year 1938 in England and on 17th July 1940 he joined the British AIR Force. In 1944 he was transferred to the Indian AIR Force and was granted an emergency commission in the Accountant Branch of that Force on 1st February 1944. He was granted a permanent Commission in 1947 and after receiving promotion Commission in 1947 and after receiving promotion he was Acting in the rank of Group Captain on 12th November 1962. It appears that towards the end of October 1963 he was called to the AIR Headquarters by AIR Vice-Marshal Raja Ram. He was questioned about 'his contacts...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1983P& H70
S.S. Sandawalia, C.J.1. The larger question that looms in this set of three Civil Writ Petitions is--whether a writ of certiorari lies against a privately owned and privately managed Medical College and Hospital? Inevitably, at issue is the validity of the somewhat wide ranging observations in this context by the Division Bench in Karan Singh v. Kurukshetra University, ILR (1976) 2 Punj & Har 859. Equally significant is the question--whether private institutions imparting higher medical education are instrumentalities or agencies of the State--which had also come to the force in the hearing of this reference of the Full Bench.2. The terra firma of the factual matrix giving rise to the aforesaid issues (which are otherwise pristinely legal) may be taken from the averments in C. W. P. No. 3480 of 1981(Gurpeet Singh v. Punjab University etc. The Managing Society of the Daya Nand Medical College and Hospital--respondent No. 2, is admittedly a private institution registered under the Societ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1976P& H358
D.S. Tewatia, J.1.This petition came up for hearing before me in the first instance. On being referred by me to a larger Bench, it has been placed before us for decision.2. The point of law that arises for determination in this petition is, as to whether in the case of a transferred prisoner, it is the Government of the State in whose prison the convict after transfer is lodged, the appropriate Government to remit or commute the sentence of such a person or that of the State in whose territory the prisoner had been convicted.3. Before dealing with the question of law aforesaid, the relevant facts bearing thereon and which are not in dispute, may at this stage be noticed. These can be stated thus: the petitioner, Jhanda Singh, in the first instance, was convicted by the Sessions Judge, Meerut, in Sessions Trial Nos. 72 and 73 of 1952, and was sentenced to life imprisonment on 27th September, 1952, in each case. He was subsequently convicted by the Sessions Judge, Karnal, in Sessions Tri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR2005P& H94; (2004)138PLR803
Hemant Gupta, J.1. The plaintiffs are in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the first Appellate Court whereby suit for declaration and for permanent injunction was dismissed in appeal.2. The plaintiffs have sough declaration inter-alia on the ground that they are entered as mortgagees with possession with respect to the agricultural land measuring 28 Kanals 13 Marias as detailed in the plaint. An area measuring 14 kanals 15 marlas, i.e. 2338/4516th share in the land measuring 27 kanals 13 marlas has been auctioned by defendants No.l to 4 in favour of the defendant No. 5 on 16.1.1991. The custodian has wrongly been entered as mortgagors of the said share in the suit land. The plaintiffs are also having some share in the suit land but are recorded as mortgagees of the entire land for times immemorial for the last more than 100 years. Some or the Muslims became evacuees and the share of the said co-sharers came to vest in the custodian and the said share is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1992)101PLR335
Iqbal Singh Tiwana, J.1. Firstly, the factual-matrix.Om Parkash respondent (No. 3) purchased site No. 180 in Grain Market, Chandigarh, in an auction held by respondent No. 2-the Estate Officer, Union Territory, Chandigarh, on 6th of February, 1972, Since in terms of the sale the vendee-respondent failed to pay the instalments, the said site was resumed by respondent No. 2 vide order dated 11th of February, 1975 (copy Annexure P-1) passed under Section 8-A of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) (Chandigarh Amendment) Act, 19 73, (for short, the Act), even though in the meantime the respondent No. 3 had raised a building thereupon. Om Parkash preferred an appeal against this order of resumption under Section 10(1) of the Act and the same was disposed of by the Chief Administrator, Chandigarh, vide his order dated 1st of September, 1975 (copy Annexure P-2 in C.W.P. No. 2077 of 1980), with the stipulation that in case the vendee paid all the amount due from him along with in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1980)14CTR(P& H)119; [1980]123ITR658(P& H)
J.V. Gupta, J. 1. This reference has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Chandigarh Bench), under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), at the instance of the assessee, a registered firm, known as M/s. Pearl Woollen Mills, Ludhiana. The relevant assessment year is 1964-65, the accounting year is the financial year 1963-64. According to the Tribunal, the following two questions of law did arise out of its order dated 31st January, 1974, (annex. 'C'):' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee could, in law, deny its liability to tax in respect of capital gains on the ground that it being a firm was not a legal entity capable of owning a capital asset ? 2. If the tax on capital gains has to be charged in the hands of the registered firm under Section 114 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, then whether the 1st proviso to Section 114(b)(ii) prescribing the minimum rate of tax at 15% on net capital gains wo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : II(2001)DMC684
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. 1. The appellant has been found guilty of offences under Sections 302, 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo sentence of imprisonment for life and to pay fine. Aggrieved by the judgment, he has filed this appeal.2. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place at 4.30 P.M. on April.7. 1995. The prosecution story was in the first instance disclosed by Vijay Kumar (PW6) 10 ASI Dayal Singh (PW8) at 12.30 A.M. on the morning of April 8', 1995. On the basis of this statement, FIR was registered at 12.45 A.M. at Police Station Ambala City. After the recording of the FIR, Meena Kumari who had suffered burn injuries passed away at 2.35-A.M. Her post-mortem was performed at the Civil Hospital. Ambala at 1 1.30 P.M.3. According to the prosecution. Meena Kumari. the deceased, was married to Pawan Kumar-the appellant about three years prior to the occurrence. They had a son who was six months old. At the time of marriage, the parents of the ...
Tag this Judgment!