Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1994)107PLR590
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Despite the fact that the Government of Haryana had issued circular letter No. 9054-4GS-70/32231 dated December 22, 1970 '(Annexure P-1) almost twenty-four years ago for giving employment on compassionate ground to one of the members of the family of a deceased Government servant and which circular, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, has been adopted and made applicable to the service of the Haryana State Minor Irrigation and Tubewell Corporation (respondent No. 2). The petitioner has been denied appointment as a dependent of the deceased employee Munshi Ram and inaction on the part of respondent No. 2 to give employment to the petitioner as a dependent of the deceased employee has compelled him to seek redress from this Court by means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. Respondent No. 2 is public sector undertaking incorporated under the Companies Act. According to the petitioner, it is an instrumentality o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1992CriLJ3732
..... 4.40 p.m. as stated by dr. j. p. chaudhary, registrar, medical college, rohtak (pw 2), dr. arun gera then house surgeon sent intimation exhibit p. 3 to the police about the death of rohtas in the medical college rohtak. on receipt of this information, s.i. inder singh (pw 14) got changed the offence to one under section 302 ..... 9-25 a.m. and on its basis a case under section 307, indian penal code, was got registered against the accused vide f.i.r. exhibit pt/2 at police station sadar, charkhi dadri at 9.40 a.m. sub-inspector ram kumar after deputing head constable sadhu ram to guard the spot, left for medical college hospital, rohtak, for ..... , besides an abrasion on the left forearm on its dorsomedial aspect. both these injuries were, however, ultimately declared simple in nature.5. dr. disodia sent intimation, exhibit pg, to the police about the arrival of the injured persons in the hospital. on receipt of this intimation, at about 8.00 a.m. at fuwara chowk, dadri, sub-inspector ram kumar (pw .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1993CriLJ1400
..... report that his daughter had been burnt after being killed, he also stated that she had committed suicide by burning herself after being harassed by the accused.2. the police, on the information aforesaid, investigated the matter but far from collecting any evidence with regard to the first allegation of gobind ram with regard to murder of nirmala, ..... statements of the witnesses referred to above and on considering the matter again and again, we have reached to the conclusion that even though it may be a case bordering on the culpability of the accused, the same, however, falls short of the penal provisions thus resulting into giving benefit of doubt to the accused it shall be ..... treatment but as stated in the earlier part of the judgment, the allegations made in the letter, even if found to be true, in our view, would border on involvement of the accused for abetting the commission of suicide but would fall short of the dimensions which are enough for a normal human being to commit suicide. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2005)139PLR316
Kiran Anand Lall, J.1. This F.A.O. is directed the judgment and decree dated 7.3.1996 passed by the District Judge, Karnal, dissolving marriage of parties under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') on the ground of cruelty. About the pleaded second ground of divorce viz. desertion, the court held that as the petition was presented by the husband-respondent in March, 1992 i.e. barely six months after the wife-appellant left the marital home on 15.9.1991, this ground was not available to him.2. The case of the respondent herein, as set up in the divorce petition, was that marriage between the parties was solemnised on 15.11.1984 at Rohtak according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. After marriage, the appellant joined the respondent at his matrimonial house, at Karnal. Three children, Sunny, Sapna, and Jimmy were born out of the wedlock. The behaviour and attitude of the appellant, from the very beginning, was harsh and cruel towards the respondent and his parent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [1995]82CompCas203(P& H)
..... to this litigation to raise objections, seriously contests the first contention and styles the same not only impermissible in the facts and circumstances of the case but also one which borders on a plea that can be well termed dishonest. the facts and circumstances that are available, however, in my considered view, debar the objectors from asking for acceptance of objections .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1998P& H168; (1998)118PLR514
ORDERSwatanter Kumar, J. 1. The basic principle that the plaintiff is dominus litis of his suit and a party objectedto by him cannot be impleaded in the proceedings, is not an absolute principle or rule. The provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure, hereinafter referred to as the Code, are exception to this Rule. The parties to a suit are governed and regulated by the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code, which would finally be the guiding factor for the Court to determine, whether an applicant is a necessary or proper party to a suit or not. This is the precise question which arises for consideration in the present revision petition.2. Before entering into the realm of legal precepts of this proposition it will be appropriate to refer to the facts giving rise to the present revision petitions i.e. Civil Revision No. 1204 of 1997 and Civil Revision No. 1706 of 1996. Admittedly, Kashmiri Lal and Krishan Lal were the joint owners of the property i.e. plot/House No. 4...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1998)119PLR250
V.S. Aggarwal, J.1. Against petitioner Arshad Ali and Saleem in the petition for eviction filed by the respondents, an order of eviction had been passed Under Section 13(2)(ii) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh, on 2.2.1994 on the ground that the property in question has been sub-let by Arshad petitioner to Saleem. The appeal preferred by the petitioner with the Appellate Authority, Chandigarh, was dismissed on 11.10.1995. Hence, the present revision petition.2. Some of the relevant facts necessary for the disposal of the present petition for eviction can conveniently be relisted. The respondents alleging themselves as landlord of the shop in question had claimed eviction of the petitioners on the ground of non-payment of rent, change of user of the property which was stated to have been sublet without the consent of the respondents and that the petitioners have caused damage to the properly in question and impaired its value and u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2006)144PLR454
S.N. Aggarwal, J.1. Banu Mai alias Banu Ram (in short Banu Mal) was the original owner of the suit land. He had executed a Will in favour of his daughter Jeewani alias Munni Devi (in short Munni Devi) on 14.4.1937 for the suit land. But, subsequently, he had executed a Will on 27.3.1943 in favour of Raghbir Singh, respondent No. 29 (predecessor in interest of the present petitioners) who was his collateral from the third degree. However, the said Will was for the life time of said Raghbir Singh and after his death, the property was to revert back to the legal heirs (respondent Nos. 1 to 6) of Munni Devi daughter of Banu Mal. However, Raghbir Singh got mutation No. 1427 entered in favour of his wife Smt. Kesho Devi, his son Devi Samp (petitioner No. 1) and son's wife Smt. Maya Devi (petitioner No. 2) on 26.2.1954 on the basis of oral Hibbanama (gift) allegedly executed by Babu Mai for the land measuring 835 kanals 7 marlas. The said mutation was sanctioned on 2.3.1954. Said Babu Mal die...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1996P& H183; (1996)113PLR95
ORDERV.K. Bali, J.1. Rumika Yadav daughter of late Lt. Colonel Rajinder Singh Yadav, through Civil Writ Petition No. 12081 of 1992 filed by her under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, had challenged the admission granted tp Ms. Yang Chan Kishore in the M.B.B.S./B.D.S. course notified by theMaharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak (hereinafter to be referred to as the University) for the year 1992 in the reserved category meant for the childern of the deceased/disabled officers (if there was no such case the children of ex-servicemen) on the sole ground that neither Ms. Yang Chan Kishore nor her father was domicile of Haryana State, a condition precedent for admission in MDBS/BDS and had yet successfully sought admission under the reserved category by forging documents evidencing her to be a domicile of Haryana. During the currency of the writ-petition, petitioner Rumika Yadav was allowed provisional admission by an interim order passed in that behalf by the Bench, seized of the mat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1994)107PLR46
N.K. Kapoor, J.1. The Chief Administrator, Haryana urban Development Authority, has sought quashing of the award dated 6.10.1993, Annexure P-3, whereby respondent No. 2 has been ordered to be reinstated w.e.f. the date of his termination of service with continuity of service as well as has been awarded 50% of the back wages.2. The primary contention of the counsel is that the Tribunal erred in law in invoking the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act as it was not a case of termination of service. The respondent-workman was appointed each time for 89 days and his services stood automatically expired on completion of 89 days and so such a case will come within the purview of Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short 'the Act'). Besides this, it urged that the HUDA was not an industry and so the workman was not covered under the definition of workman. Examined thus, the award of the Labour Court is contrary to the provisions of the Act and thus unsust...
Tag this Judgment!