Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-09-1974
Reported in : [1974]33STC479(P& H)
Prem Chand Pandit, J.1. This order will dispose of two connected Sales Tax References Nos. 16 and 17 of 1972. The year of assessment is 1957-58. The first reference is under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, hereinafter called the Punjab Act, and the other is under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the Central Act.2. On 28th October, 1970, a Bench of this Court directed the Sales Tax Tribunal, Punjab, to refer the following two questions of law for our opinion:(1) Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the medicinal preparations given to the named patients on his own prescriptions by a registered medical practitioner amounts to a manufacture of medicine and pharmaceutical preparations?(2) Whether the petitioner is a 'dealer' within the provisions of the Punjab and Central Acts and the medicines prepared on his own prescriptions and delivered to his own patients who actually consult him amount to 'sale' within the meaning of the Punjab and the Central...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-02-1974
Reported in : (1975)IILLJ19P& H
1. Dr. S. Herbert was employed at the Christian Hospital, Jagadhri, Ambala district, Ambala. On 31st August, 1970, be served the following demand notice on the Chairman. Punjab Synod Medical Board, Francis Newton Hospital, Ferozepur, respondent No. 1:Since I have not been taken on duty despite my personal protest and justified approaches it is, therefore, presumed that you have terminated my services without any notice and without assigning any reason.I am, therefore, constrained to serve upon you with this demand notice that I should be immediately reinstated, otherwise the Board will be responsible for further legal action.Five copies of this demand notice were also sent to the Labour and Conciliation Officer, Yamuna Nagar, who initiated conciliation proceedings which proved abortive. Consequently, the State of Haryana referred the following dispute for adjudication by the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court, Haryana at Rohtak:Whether the termination of services of Dr. S. Herbert w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-07-1974
Reported in : [1975]45CompCas261(P& H)
Bal Raj Tuli, J.1. The Punjab Finance Private Ltd. (in liquidation), through its official liquidator filed the present petition under Section 446(2) read with Section 468 of the Companies Act; 1956, for the recovery of Rs. 20,318.67 from the respondents. The claim is based on a loan raised by the respondents from the petitioner-company on the security of a vehicle on hire-purchase basis. After the issues were framed and the case was fixed for the evidence of the parties, the learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 1 and 3 made an application for the framing of an additional issue to the following effect:' Whether the claim petition for recovery of the amount from the respondents is in the nature of a suit and as such ad valorem court-fee should be paid? '2. Arguments have been heard on this issue which has been treated as preliminary. The argument of the learned counsel for the respondents is that any action by the official liquidator for the recovery of the amount from the debtors of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-14-1974
Reported in : AIR1974P& H162
Bal Raj Tuli, J.1. A number of writ petitions have been filed challenging the constitutional validity of the various provisions of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1973(hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Act received the assent of the President of India on March 24, 1973, and was published in the Punjab Govt. Gazette under notification No. 12-Leg/73 dated April 2, 1973, from which date it came into force. It is not necessary to state the facts of any case because all these cases (C. W. Nos. 3145, 3150, 3210, 3254, 3287, 3288, 3293, 3456 to 3463, 3469, 3470, 3472, 3503, 3547 to 3550, 3564 to 3568, 3629 and 4004 of 1973) will be decided on merits by a learned Single Judge in the light of the decisions rendered in this judgment.2. The sections of the Act which have been challenged as ultra vires are Section 4, Section 5 and the definitions of 'family' and 'person' in Section 3(4) and (10). These sections read as under:--'4(1). Subject to t he provisions of Section 5, no person shall own...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-07-1974
Reported in : AIR1975P& H102
Bal Raj Tuli, J.1. The petitionersin this bunch of twelve writ petitions (C. W. Nos. 1118, 1133, 1180, 1181, 1208, 1225, 1226, 1231, 1238, 1277. 1351 and 1352 of 1974), are either owners or lessees of saltpetre at various places in the State of Haryana. They have challenged the constitutional validity of the Haryana Minerals (Vesting of Rights) Act. 1973 (Haryana Act No. 48 of 1973), (hereinafter referred to as the Act), principally on the ground that the Haryana State Legislature lacked the legislative competence to enact that law. The other grounds raised by the petitioners will be dealt with later on as I purpose to deal with this ground in the first instance. This order will dispose of all the writ petitions.2. The Act received the assent of the President of India on December 16, 1973, and was published in the Haryana Government Gazette (Extraordinary) dated December 20, 1973. and came into force on that date. The preamble of the Act shows that it has been enacted to vest the miner...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-08-1974
Reported in : AIR1976P& H1
Bal Raj Tuli, J.1. Tkis judgment will dispose of 211 civil writ petitions (Nos. 2513, 3261, 3270 to 3274, 3712 to 3720, 3722 to 3729, 3753 to 3757, 3761, 3790, 3913 to 3954, 4205, 4206, 4291 to 4293, 4303, 4323, 4366, 4373 to 4376, 4311, 4315 to 4387, 4395, 4396. 4402, 4403, 4405, 4409 to 4412, 4421, 4436, 4438, 4440, 4441, 4467, 4441, 4419, 4544, 4548, 4549, 4570, 4572, 4580, 4514, 4607, 4610, 4617, 4625, 4688, 4692, 4699, 4709, 4717 to 4727, 4730, 4741, 4743, 4775, 4780 to 4782, 4792, 4800, 4818, 4844, 4865, 4866, 4869, 4870, 4874 to 4885, 4192 to 4906, 4910, 4911, 4919, 4923, 4924, 4935, 4947, 4962 to 4964, 4967 to 4972, 4985, 4990, 5002 to 5004, 5007, 5008, 5028, 5029, 5035, 5052, 5053, 5059, 5081, 5084, 5100, 5105, 5109, 5113, 5117 and 5122 of 1974) as common questions of law are involved. 127 writ petitions relate to the market committees in the State of Haryana and 84 to the market committees in the State of Punjab.2. The Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act (Punjab Act 23 of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-12-1974
Reported in : AIR1975P& H148
Bhopinder Singh Dhillon, J. 1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Respondent No. 3, Dr. Abchal Singh, purchased a piece of agricultural land on April 10, 1968 from Sarvshri Lilak Chand and Raj Kumar, owners of the land situate in village Hebowal Kalan, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. 'The petitionerHukam Singh claimed himself to be a tenant in possession of the said land. Dr. Abchal Singh, after having purchased the said land, is alleged to have made attempts to dispossess Hukam Singh petitioner from the land in dispute. On May 19, 1968 at about 5.30 A. M., Dr. Abchal Singh fired a gun shot at the petitioner which hit him on his right leg and caused multiple injuries. At the same time he fired another gun shot which hit Bawa Singh, brother of the petitioner, who later on succumbed to the injuries. A case under Sections 302/307/447 of the Indian Penal Code etc. was registered against Dr. Abchal Singh and some others in which the Additional Sessions...
Tag this Judgment!