Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-25-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H356
Sandhawalia, J.1. Whether 'brick-earth' has validly been declared to be a minor mineral by virtue of the General Government Notification No. G.S.R. 436, dated the 1st of June, 1958, issue under Section 3(e) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation & Development) Act, 1957, is the important and slightly intricate question which primarily calls for determination in these two connected Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 1840 and 2004 of 1970. Identical questions of law and fact arise in these petitions and the learned counsel for the parties are agreed that this judgment shall govern both of them.2. The broad outline of the facts is not in dispute. It would suffice to make a reference to the facts in Civil Writ No. 2004 of 1970 only to appreciate the primarily legal contentions which have been raised. The petitioner-firm of Messrs. Amar Singh Modi Lal carries on the business of the manufacture of bricks and is a licensee under the Punjab Control of Brick Supply Order 1956. It installed a brick kiln o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-15-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H65
Prem Chand Jain, J.1. The short question that requires determination in these cases may be stated thus :-Does an appeal lie under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent against the decision of a learned Single Judge in appeal filed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Claims Tribunal) given under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) ?2. The view of this Court as is evident from the Bench decision in Fazilka Dabwali Transport Co. (Private) Ltd. v. Madan Lal, (1968) 70 Pun LR 9 = (AIR 1968 Punj 277), is that such an appeal is not competent under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. At the time of the preliminary hearing, the correctness of the said Bench decision was challenged and on the strength of a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Kuldip Lal Bhandari, (1969) 71 Pun LR (Delhi Section) 318 = (AIR 1970 Delhi 37) (FB), it was contended that an appeal by u...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-08-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H72
P.C. Pandit, J. 1. This order will dispose of three connected Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 299, 300 and 485 of 1970. It is conceded by the counsel for the parties that the decision in Letters Patent Appeal No. 299 of 1970 will govern the other appeals as well.2. Jaisi Ram was the owner of the land in dispute. He filed four writ petitions (Nos. 2361 to 2364 of 1963) under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution against his tenants on four different parcels of land. His prayer was that the orders passed by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, conferring proprietary rights on the tenants under the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, hereinafter called the Act, in each case be quashed. All these petitions came up for hearing before C. G. Suri, J. and since the questions of law and fact involved in them were similar and the Revenue Authorities had also taken up those cases together, the learned Judge disposed of the writ petitions by one judgment. All those petitions were dismissed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-15-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H99
Gurdev Singh, J. 1. The question for the consideration of this Full Bench may be stated thus:--'Whether a vendee who has joined with him a stranger in purchasing agricultural land or immovable property can by acquiring the interest of the stranger co-vendee by gift or sale successfully resist a suit for pre-emption in view of the provisions of Section 21-A of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913?'2. It has arisen in the following manner:--Gharib Singh, Harnam Singh, Partap Singh and Kartar Singh, four sons of Kishna, jointly held 225 Kanals 9 Marlas of agricultural land situate in village Kiampur. Kartar Singh having died, his son Harchand Singh sold his 1/4 th share to his uncle Graham Singh and his wife Shrimati Gurnam Kaur by a registered sale deed, dated 15th March, 1966 (Exhibit D. A.) for Rs.4000/-. On 15th March, 1967, Harnam Singh, a brother of Gharib Singh vendee, brought suit for pre-emption on the plea that he was a cosharer and also near collateral of the vendor Harchand Singh....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-24-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H50
Harbans Singh, C.J. 1. This judgment will dispose of Civil Writs No. 2559 of 1969, 3575, 3576, 3577, 3640, 3641, 3642 and 3643 of 1970, 10, 1209, 1214, 1215, 1216, 1221, 1246, 1247, 1248, 1249, 1250, 1251, 1252, 1253, 1254, 1317, 1318, 1319, 1320, 1323, 1324, 1328, 1344, 1408, 1416, 1490, 1572, 1616 and 1679 of 1971 as they involve common questions of law and fact.2. In all the above mentioned writ petitions the point raised is whether the State Government can under the relevant law and the rules exploit shora (saltpetre) found in the soil or on the surface of the lands belonging either to the individuals or to the Gram Panchayats. Civil Writ 1221 of 1971 would be taken as a typical case where the land belonged to an individual and Civil Writ 1328 of 1971 as a typical case where the land belonged to the Gram Panchayat concerned.3. We will first take up Civil Writ 1221 of 1971. On 25th February, 1971, a notification was issued by the Department of Industries, Haryana, notifying for the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-15-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H83
R.S. Narula, J.1. I propose to dispose of by this judgment 97 writ petitions which were heard together along with Letters Patent Appeal No. 762 of 1970. These writ petitions have to be divided into four groups in order to facilitate reference to the separate set of arguments advanced in respect of each group. The prayer in all these petitions is to quash the orders of the Collector, Kaithal, district Karnal, determining the leases of the respective parcels of land of which possession had been taken by the Collector under Section 3 of the East Punjab Utilization of Lands Act (38 of 1949) (hereinafter called the Act), and which land had therefore been leased out to different persons for a period of twenty years. The first group is comprised of 57 petitions (Civil Writs Nos. 1376, 1377, 1383 to 1386, 1395, 1416, 1432, 1433, 1459, 1471, 1482, 1491, 1521, 1549, 1550, 1559, 1573, 1604, 1607, 1651 to 1654, 1669, 1670, 1672, 1694, 1713, 1752, 1784, 1785, 1786, 1791, 1817, 1836, 1944, 2000, 200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-19-1971
Reported in : AIR1973P& H76
ORDERHarbans Singh, C.J. 1. The facts giving rise to this evil revision may briefly be stated as under; the Model Town Welfare Council, Ludhiana, (hereinafter referred to as the society) is a Society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. On 20th February 1958, vide Exhibit A-3 a plot of land measuring 1.29 Kanals in the Model Town Ludhiana, was transferred by the Punjab Government to the society free of cost, for the specific purpose of constructing a library building thereupon at its own cost within three years. The terms of transfer also provided for resumption of the plot by the Government in case of non-compliance with any term. A clear provision, however, was made that the time of three years could be extended by the Deputy Commissioner if the failure to complete the construction by the due date as due to reasons beyond the control of the purchaser.2. It is stated that after the transfer of the plot, the petitioner-society constructed some shops on a portion ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-20-1971
Reported in : AIR1972P& H210
ORDER1. This is a writ petition by the Karnal Distillery Co. Limited, Karnal against the State of Punjab now State of Haryana and the Financial Commissioner and the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab now Haryana, respectively impleaded as respondents Nos. 1 to 3 under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution impugning the validity of notice dated December 14, 1964 served on the petitioner-company to determine its license on December 21, 1965 after the expiry of period of one year commencing from the date of service of the notice under Section 21(b) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (hereinafter called the Act) read with Rule 7 of the Punjab Distillery Rules, 1932 framed thereunder (hereinafter called the Rules) and condition No. 9 of the license issued under Section 20(2) of the Act. Considering the importance of the questions raised, the case has been referred by Pandit, J. to a Division Bench.2. Facts leading to the writ petition are as follows:--The petitioner-company is a limited c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-18-1971
Reported in : 1972CriLJ1349
A.D. Koshal, J.1. This appeal filed by the State of Punjab against the judgment of Shri Asa Singh Gill. Special Judge. Gurdaspur. dated the 20th of July. 1970 holding the trial of respondent No. 1 for offences under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, and of respondent No. 2 under Section 165A of the Indian Penal Code, conducted by him. to be without jurisdiction and. therefore null and void has been entrusted for decision to a Full Bench in pursuance of the order of reference dated the 18th of May. 1971. made by a Division Bench consisting of ray learned brother Tewatia. J. and myself and the sole question requiring determination therein is whether the sanction for prosecution of respondent No. 1 purporting to have been given by the State Government under Section 6 of the Act was or was not validly accorded.2. The facts leading to this appeal may be briefly stated. Respondent No 1 is a member o...
Tag this Judgment!