Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-25-1966
Reported in : AIR1967P& H272
ORDERR.S. Narula, J.1. The inherent jurisdiction of the Sikh Gurdwaras Judicial Commission, Amritsar (hereinafter called the Commission), established under Section 70 of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925 (Punjab Act 8 of 1925) (hereinafter called the Act) to issue temporary injunction pendente lite under Order 39 Rule 1 or 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been questioned in this case by Balbir Singh petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution by claiming a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash and set aside the order of the Commission, dated August 26, 1966 (Annexure 'F'), whereby the petitioner has been restrained from interfering in the day-to-day administration of the Gurdwara and exercising powers conferred on him as President of the Committee of Management of Gurdwara Dera Sahib, Batala, during the pendency of a petition under Section 142 of the Act filed by Manohar Singh respondent No. 2.2. Gurdwaras Dera Sahib and Sat Kartarian at Batala in district Gurdaspur have admitt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-23-1966
Reported in : [1966]18STC240(P& H)
ORDERS.K. Kapur, J.1. The following three questions of law have been referred by the Chief Commissioner, Delhi, by his order dated 30th October, 1958, under Section 21 of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as extended to the Union territory of Delhi :- (a) Whether Section 29 of the Limitation Act applies to revision applications under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as extended to Delhi. (b) If the answer to (a) be in the affirmative, does Section 29 of the Limitation Act enlarge the scope of Section 12(2) of the said Act, so as to make it applicable to revision, which is not a proceeding mentioned in that section. (c) Whether apart from Sections 29 and 12(2) of the Limitation Act, the mere requirement of Rule 62 under the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 as extended to Delhi, that every revision application should be accompanied.by a copy of the order, is sufficient justification by itself to exclude the time taken in obtaining such a copy, for the purposes of cal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-21-1966
Reported in : AIR1967P& H195
1. This judgment will dispose of four Letters Patent Appeals (Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 57D, 58D, 59D of 1962 and 73D of 1965). Main arguments have been addressed in L, P. A. 58-D of 1962 and it is conceded that the other three appeals would stand or fall with this one. The facts giving rise to this appeal may now briefly be stated.2. The petitioner claiming to be a displaced person from district Hazara N. W. F. P., now forming part of West Pakistan, migrated to India and settled down permanently in village Tihar in Delhi. He was owner of agricultural land and buildings in West Pakistan. His claim in respect of agricultural land was verified for 4 standard acres and 9-1/2 units while his claim in respect of rural buildings was verified for Rs. 9,441/8/-. The latter claim was, however, rejected on the ground that the petitioner had already been allotted agricultural land in India against the land held by him in Pakistan. His claim for agricultural land having thus been verified, he wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-17-1966
Reported in : AIR1966P& H540; [1967]64ITR419(P& H)
S.K. Kapur, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of D.K. Mahajan, J. dated 5th November, 1962, passed on a writ petition filed by the appellants, arises in the following circumstances :2. The appellants claim to be members of a joint Hindu family carrying on business in coarse cloth under the name and style of Messrs Chhotey Lal Sunder Lal in Jaipur city. The Jaipur Excess Profits Tax Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Jaipur Act) received the assent of the Maharaja and came in to force on the 22nd August, 1944. Three notices under Section 15 of the Jaipur Act were received by the appellants for the years ending Dewali, 1944, Dewali, 1945, and 31st March, 1946. The appellants deposited Rs. 3,066-9-0 on 13th January, 1947, with respect to the first year and Rs. 5,881-8-0 with respect to the second and third years, under Section 32 of the Jaipur Act.3. There were rapid constitutional changes after August, 1947, with respect to the State of Jaipur, and eventually on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-18-1966
Reported in : AIR1966P& H483
D. Falshaw, C.J.1. This is an appeal filed by Balwant Singh under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the order of Harbans Singh, J., dismissing his petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The facts are not in dispute. Sodhi Lal Singh respondent applied to the Assistant Collector, Second Grade. Moga, under Section 14-A (ii) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, for the recovery of Rs. 900 from Balwant Singh appellant as the tenant of certain land for the harvests of kharif 1959 and rabi 1960 and a notice of demand in the prescribed form 'N' was issued to Balwant Singh and served on him on the 6th of November 1960. He disputed the correctness of the amount demanded and claimed that only a sum of Rs. 605 was due, the annual rent of the land, which was 88 kanals or 11 acres in extent, being Rs. 55 per acre. By his order, dated the 30th of December 1960 the Assistant Collector held that the rent due was in fact Rs. 605 and in his order he recorded t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-15-1966
Reported in : AIR1967P& H53
S.B. Capoor, J.1. The following three questions have been referred to the Full Bench by the order of the Division Bench dated the 14th February, 1964:(1) If out of the main residential house belonging to a non-agriculturist judgment-debtor a portion of it is let by him to tenant (s), is the whole house deemed to be in his occupation within the meaning of Section 60(1)(ccc) of the Code of Civil rocedure?(2) If any building attached to the main residential house belonging to and occupied by non-agriculturist judgment-debtor is let out to a tenant, will that portion be considered to be in his occupation within the meaning of the above provision?(3) Does it make any difference if the letting is not voluntary, but the result of the order of a competent authority, e.g. of a requisitioning or the rehabilitation authority?2. These questions arise in three appeals from execution proceedings .. .. .. ExecutionSecond Appeal No. 450 of 1963, Execution Second Appeal No. 812 of 1963 and Letters Pate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-24-1966
Reported in : AIR1966P& H423
R.S. Narula, J.1. This judgment will dispose of a bunch of three writ petitions (C. W. No. 396 of 1963--Khan Chand v. State of Punjab, C. W. No. 196 of 1963--Sidhu Ram v. State of Punjab, and C. W. No. 1605 of 1963--Hari Chand v. State of Punjab), in which common questions relating to interpretation and scope of the second proviso to Sub-section (3) of Section 2 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 10 of 1953, hereinafter called the Ceiling Act, call for decision.2. The facts giving rise to these cases are also somewhat similar. Main arguments have been addressed on the side of the petitioners by the learned counsel in Khan Chand's case. The brief facts of that writ petition may, therefore, be first stated. The petitioner is a displaced person from West Pakistan. In lieu of agricultural land left behind by him in Pakistan the petitioner was allotted 137.22 Standard Acres equivalent to 330.40 ordinary acres to land in villages Kotli and Suchan, Tehsil Sirsa, District Hissar. Righ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-07-1966
Reported in : AIR1968P& H87; 1968CriLJ369
Gurdev Singh, J. 1. This is a State-appeal against the order of Shri G.R. Gogiam, Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana, dated 22nd October, 1964, acquitting therespondent Kali Ram of charges under Sections 324 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code without having recorded the entire evidence that the prosecution had to produce. The relevant facts are as follows: -2. On 8th September 1963, Gurmit Singh, a resident of Bhangali Kalan, district Amritsar, who had brought a dancing party to the fair at Raikot in the District of Ludhiana, lodged a report at the local police station complaining that the respondent Kali Ram had attacked him with a knife, and geting hold of Shrimati Nishi, a member of the dancing party had caught her by the breasts. On due investigation, the respondent was prosecuted, and in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 251A of the Criminal Procedure Code, charges under Sections 324 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against him by a Magistrate Fi...
Tag this Judgment!