Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-19-2000
Reported in : (2000)126PLR94
V.K. Bali, J.1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of three connected matters, i.e., LPA Nos. 885, 889 of 1992 and CWP No. 15994 of 1992, as common questions of law and fact are involved therein. Learned Counsel for the parties also suggested likewise. The facts have, however, been extracted from LPA No. 885 of 1992. 2. Having retired as a Electrician a decade ago on June 30, 1990, Jagdamba Dutt (hereinafter to be referred as the petitioner) has not vacated the quarter allotted to him when he was in the employment of Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, (hereinafter to be referred as 'appellant'). Having raised substantial construction by spending considerable amount thereon, he was not prepared to vacate it at any stage nor even now. Concededly, the appellant has withheld his provident fund, gratuity and encashment of earned leave on the plea of adjustment of the amount that petitioner has to pay by way of house rent/penalty. The pertinent question that has been raised in this Le...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-22-2000
Reported in : (2001)IILLJ1164P& H
Mehtab S. Gill, J.1. Both these writ petitions bearing Nos. 9471 and 9472 of 1999 arise out of the award dated August 26, 1998 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No. 1 -the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-11. Faridabad and they are being heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment as common questions of law and facts are involved therein.2. Petitioner-workman has filed a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of certio-rari for quashing the award dated August 26, 1998 (Annexure P-3) passed by respondent No. 1 the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-II, Faridabad.3. Petitioner-workman has averred that he was ap-poinled as a Chowkidar on May 25,1993. No appointment letter was issued to him and he continued in service till April 26, 1994. His salary was Rs. 1056/- per month. He was not allowed to work and no retrench-ment notice or compensation was granted to him. Later on, petitioner-workman filed a case against the management under the Payment of W...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-28-2000
Reported in : AIR2000P& H187; (2000)125PLR779
N.K. Sud, J.1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961, (for short 'the Act') and is dealing in the sale, purchase, storage and processing of agricultural produce within the notified market area of the Market Committee, Sadhaura in the State of Haryana. The Administrator, Market Committee Sadhaura made an assessment for the period 1-4-1996 to 31-3-1997 and determined the total market fee leviable on the petitioner at Rs. 1,62,836.89 out of which the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 38,139.74. Thus, a sum of Rs. 1,24,697.15 was determined as recoverable from the petitioner. The petitioner was also held liable for payment of an equal amount as penalty for submitting a false return. The petitioner filed CWP 15384 of 1997 before this Court challenging the assessment order dated 12-9-1997. The said writ petition was dismissed on 13-10-1997 as not maintainable on the ground that an appeal was competent against the order of assessment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-27-2000
Reported in : I(2002)ACC530; 2002ACJ530
R.L. Anand, J. 1. By this judgment I dispose of two F.A.O. No. 1524 of 1997 The New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Partap Singh and others and F.A.O. No. 1558 of 1997 Partap Singh and others v. Nazir etc. as both these appeals can be disposed of by one judgment. Facts are being taken from F.A.O. No. 1524 of 1997.2. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner. In the FAO No. 1524 of 1997 filed by the Insurance Company, the appellants have prayed for the reduction in the amount of award whereas in FAO No. 1158 of 1997 the appellants have prayed for the enhancement of the compensation of Rs. 4,20,000/- which was awarded by the Tribunal.3. The brief facts of the case are that Shri Partap Singh and his wife Smt. Vidhya Rani, the parents of deceased Dinesh Kumar, filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against Nazir Singh Driver, Suriner Pal Singh owner of truck No. DIL 836 and the New India Assurance Company. The accident took place on 10.11.1993. Deceased Dinesh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-27-2000
Reported in : II(2002)ACC393
R.L. Anand, J.1. By this judgment I dispose of two F.A.O. Nos. 1524 of 1997, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Partap Singh, and 1558 of 1997, Partap Singh v. Nazir, as both these appeals can be disposed of by one judgment. Facts are being taken from F.A.O. No. 1524 of 1997.2. Some facts can be noticed in the following manner:In the F.A.O. No.1524 of 1997 filed by the Insurance Company, the appellants have prayed for the reduction in the amount of award whereas in F.A.O. No. 1558 of 1997 the appellants have prayed for the enhancement of the compensation of Rs. 42,000/-which was awarded by the Tribunal.3. The brief facts of the case are that Partap Singh and his wife Vidya Rani, the parents of deceased Dinesh Kumar, filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against Nazir Singh driver, Surinder Pal Singh owner of Truck No. DIL 836 and the Newvlndia Assurance Co. Ltd. The accident took place on 10.11.1993. Deceased Dinesh Kumar was going from Gurgaon to Palwal while drivi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-15-2000
Reported in : [2002]128STC116(P& H)
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. This is a petition for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the Industrial Policy, 1996 and the Industrial Incentive Code, 1996 and grant sales tax deferment to the petitioner on the total production. The other prayer made in the petition is to direct the respondents to withdraw the notices issued to the petitioner for non-filing of the sales tax returns and to refund the excess sales tax deposited during the quarters ending in June, 1999 and September, 1999.2. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. It is en-gaged in the manufacture of soaps, fatty oils, stearic acids, glycerine etc, In the year1998, the petitioner made expansion at its existing factory in village Jaladiwal, Tehsil Rajkot, District Ludhiana by making fixed term investment of Rs. 1200.78 lacs, After expansion, the commercial production was started on 31st March, 1999. The Genera! Manager, District Industries Centre, Ludhia...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-11-2000
Reported in : 2000CriLJ2585
ORDER1. The petitioner, Hardev Singh, was posted as Head Constable in 67 Battalion, Border Security Force (hereinafter to be referred as 'the BSF') at Baghapurana in October, 1991. In the night intervening 24/25th October, 1991, the petitioner was posted as Guard Commander. According to the charge-sheet (copy Annexure P1) dated 11-4-1992, the petitioner allegedly committed the murder of Constable Ratna Bhai of his unit by firing a shot from his Carbine Butt No. 54, body Registration No. JJ 0324. The petitioner was tried by the General Security Force Court (hereinafter to be referred as 'GSFC'), which was convened by the Additional Director General, BSF, Punjab Frontier, vide order dated 5th May, 1992, passed on the charge-sheet dated 14th May, 1992. The charge-sheet was served on the petitioner for committing civil offence under Section 46 of the BSF Act, i.e. the offence of murder, punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The deceased Constable Ratna Bhai was allotted Co...
Tag this Judgment!