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 : (1999)122PLR469
Jawahar Lal Gupta, J. 1. Does the Indian Oil Corporation sell cylinders to the consumers when its dealers accept refundable deposits by way of security This is the primary question that arises for consideration in this writ petition. A few facts may be noticed. 2. The petitioner is providing liquefied petroleum gas to consumers through its own distributors. This supply is made in specially designed cylinders. At the time of sanction of a connection, the dealer collects a refundable security from the consumer. The ownership of the cylinder does not get transferred to the consumer. 3. On March 25, 1998, the Assessing Authority imposed a levy of Rs. 14,06,173 in respect of the assessment year 1994-95 on the petitioner on the assumption that it sold the cylinders to the consumers when it accepted security deposits totalling Rs. 1,59,77,515. A copy of this order has been produced as annexure PI with the writ petition. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner filed an appeal. Along with the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1969P& H12; [1968]22STC335(P& H)
Mahajan, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226, and 227 of the Constitution of India. In this petition, the validity of certain provisions of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act), as amended by Punjab General Sales Tax (Haryana Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967 (hereinafter called the Amendment Act) is called in question.2. The petitioner is a Private Limited Company and carries on business of purchase and sale of cotton at Hansi. Prior to the 1st of Novemeber, 1966, Hansi was part of Punjab State (hereinafter referred to as the Old Punjab). After the reorganisation of the Punjab by the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 (Act No. 31 of 1966) from the appointed day, that is the Ist of November, 1966, the territory of the Old Punjab was divided to form the State of Haryana, the Union Territory of Chandigarh, the State of Punjab (New Punjab) and part of the territories were transferred to Himachal Pradesh.3. The Reorganisation Act, in S. 2, defines 'Old ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR2007P& H118
S.S. Saron, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the defendants- petitioners against the order dated 16.11.1998 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr Divn), Malerkotla whereby the plaintiffs-respondents have been allowed to examine a handwriting expert in their rebuttal evidence to prove documents, the onus of proof of which was on them. 2. The plaintiffs-respondents filed a suit for permanent and prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants-petitioners from dispossessing them from the land measuring 142 Bighas 10 Biswas, as detailed in the head note of the plaint situated in village Bhoodan, Tehsil Malerkotla, forcibly, illegally and without due process of law; besides for restraining the defendants-petitioners from alienating by way of sale, mortgage, exchange, gift or in any other manner the suit land. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs-respondents, in their rebuttal evidence, prayed for examination of a handwriting expert. It was submitted by the plaintif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [1972]85ITR422(P& H)
1. In order to appreciate the answers which we propose to give to the questions referred to us, it would be proper to set out the relevant undisputed facts in the chronological order. For a proper understanding of the facts, a short genealogical table of the parties may be stated : Mehtab Shah Jaini | _____________________________________________ | | | | Muni Lal Moti Lal Bhim Sen Hans Raj (1) (2) (3) (4) ________|______________ _|______________ |___ | | | | | | | | Manohar Roshan Tilak Dharam Shadi Madan Joginder Sat Lal Lal Chand pal Lal Lal pal pal (5) (7) (9) (11) (6) (8) (10) (12)2. All these members of the family of Mehtab Shah have been given numerical numbers for facility of reference as the narration of facts will show. The four sons of Mehtab Shah Nos. 1 to 4 constituted a joint Hindu family at the time when the Income-tax Act, 1918, was in force. In the year 1932, after the coming into force of the 1922 Act, these four sons effected a partition whereby the joint Hindu fami...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1985P& H103
ORDER1. M/s. Jagadhri Electric Supply and Industrial Company, Jagadhri, District Ambala, through Shri Darbari Lal Gupta, General Attorney of Shrimati Sarla Devi Gupta, sole proprietor (hereinafter referred to as 'the licencee company') was engaged in the business of supplying electric energy to the twin towns of Jagadhri and Yamuna Nagar, District Ambala, under the licence termed as 'The Jagadhri Electric Licence, 1935' granted by the erstwhile Punjab Government in November, 1935 under the provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the initial period of 30 years. In the year 1948 the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the supply Act') was enforced with effect from 10th September. Under S. 5 of this Act the Punjab State Electricity Board was constituted by the erstwhile Punjab Government. The said Board, who in terms of the provisions of S. 6 of the Act and of clause 9 of the said licence had the option of purchasing the said u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1995P& H243; (1995)109PLR614
ORDERM.S. Liberhan, J.1. Petitioner challenged the provisions of Sections 2, 3 and 5( 1) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Haryana Amendment Act, 1991 (Act No. 9 of 1992) hereinafter referred to as Act of 1992, as ultra vires of the Constitution of India.2. Succinctly, the grounds of the challenge put forth by various counsel for the petitioners in the writ petitions run as under:--(i) There is no assent of the President of India for the Act of 1992; (ii) Under the East Punjab Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1948 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Consolidation Act' lands were reserved for common purposes by imposing a proportional cut in the holdings of the proprietors from their lands within the ceiling limits and the management of such land vested in the Gram Panchayats or the State under the Consolidation Act. Now by virtue of the Act of 1992, title, interest, vests in the Gram Panchayat. It divests the petitioners of their proprietary rights i.e. title and interest, wi...
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!