Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jun-03-1992
Reported in : AIR1993P& H28
ORDERM. Rama Jois, C. J. 1. In all thesepetitions presented under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have questioned the legality of the notification issued by the Central Government dated November 3, 1988, under S. 26A of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), insofar as it bans the manufacture and sale of the fixed dose combination steroids on the ground that it is arbitrary and, therefore, not authorised by S. 26A of the Act, and also violative of Arts. 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.2. The brief facts of the case as stated in the Writ Petition No. 6882 of 1988 are these. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. Inter alia it carries on the business of preparation, manufacture, sale and distribution of drugs and pharmaceutical products. Some of the formulations which are being manufactured by the company are Cortomine tablets; Cortomine Forte tablets and Beta-Asmatide tablets. These tablets are combin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-11-1992
Reported in : (1993)104PLR18
V.K. Jhanji, J.1. This is plaintiffs' Letters Patent Appeal.Balwant Singh father of the defendants was the owner of land measuring 153 K. 19 M. i. e. the suit land. On 22.7.1964 he entered into agreement to sell land measuring 32-B, 6 B, 3-B with Arjan Singh, plaintiff No. 3. The sale price was fixed at Rs. 500/- per bigha. The Sale Deed was agreed to be executed on or before 15.6.1966. ' A sum of Rs. 1600/- was paid as stipulated under the agreement dated 22 7.1964. However, the same could not be executed because of some civil suit which was filed by Nihal Singh and Atma Singh against Balwant Singh. The suit was finally dismissed in the year 1967. On the asking of Balwant Singh, Arjan Singh paid another sum of Rs. 14,000/- in addition to Rs. 16,000/- which was paid under the agreement. Balwant Singh died on 11.2.1968. On his death, his son Surinder Singh executed another agreement to sell on 17 10.1968 in favour of plaintiffs to sell land measuring 153 K. 19 M. The agreement was execu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-30-1992
Reported in : (1992)102PLR445
S.S. Sodhi, J.1. The controversy here is with regard to the affiliation sought by the Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, for its proposed Dental College and the conditions put forth by the Panjab University, Chandigarh, for the grant of it. Do these conditions abridge or extinguish the rights guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India, being the point -in issue.2. The Christian Medical College, Ludhiana (hereinafter referred to as 'the College'), was established and is being administered by Christians and is thus admittedly a minority institution in terms of Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India.3. According to the petitioners, the principal object of the College is to train, within a Christian environment, doctors, nurses and other medical personnel, to achieve the highest possible standards of professional service. It is to this end that the programming of the student's activities, within the College and Hospital, is directed. In other words, the Management an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-31-1992
Reported in : (1993)103PLR501
G.R. Majithia, J.1. The petitioners have impugned the order of Financial Commissioner, Haryana, dated August 10. 1979 affirming in revision the order of the Commissioner, dated May 2, 1979 in this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.2. The Facts :The petitioners' father, Shri Ram Kishan, gifted 3/4th of his total holdings to his sons, the petitioners and Gulab Singh, Report in the roznamcha was entered at Serial No. 119 on November 22, 1952. The mutation entered on the basis of the gift was rejected on March 29, 1954 necessitating the filing of a Civil Suit by one of the sons, namely, Mai Ram The Suit was decreed on January 11, 1957 and mutation on basis of Civil Courts decree was sanctioned on April 21, 1957. The Collector, Hissar, vide his order dated March 24, 1961 declared 48.39 standard acres of land as surplus with the petitioners' father. The order provided that Form F be prepared accordingly and a copy thereof be sent to all concerned under rule 7 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-18-1992
Reported in : (1993)104PLR61
V.K. Bali, J.1. This order will dispose of R.F.A. No. 2350 of 1986 and R.F.A. No. 971 and 972 of 1987 as facts of all the cases, except little variations, which shall be noticed later, are the same. Facts have, however, been taken from R.F.A. No. 972 of 1987 (Ram Parkash Singla v. Union of India)2. Vide notification issued in that behalf under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 30-8-1980, the Government expressed its intention to acquire 74.83 acres of land in village Maloya for a public purpose, i.e. to create additional market yards and also to set up second grain and fruit/vegetable market, west of Sector 39, Chandigarh. The follow up declaration under Section 6 of the Act came up on 19-4-1982. Vide award dated 24-3-1983, the Land Acquisition Collector assessed Rs. 45,000/- per acre as the market price of the land under acquisition. Dissatisfied, the appellant/claimants filed reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which came up for ultimate disposal before the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-02-1992
Reported in : AIR1993P& H107; (1993)103PLR222
ORDER1. This bunch of 17 petitions viz. C.W.Ps. Nos. 7749, 8393, 9409, 9418, 12222 to 12224, 12328, 12329, 12298, 12299, 13076, 13212, 13933, 14613, 18350 and 18887 of 1991 raise a challenge to the validity of the notification (s) issued by the Central Government banning the manufacture etc. of various fixed dose combinations of drugs. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that these petitions can be disposed of by one common order. The facts as stated in C.W.P. No. 7749 of 1991 may be briefly noticed.2. The petitioner herein is a Company engaged in production, sale and distribution of various drugs and pharmaceutical products. It is producing various sedative, anxiolytic, hypnotic, analgesic and antipyretic drugs in different combinations. It claims to have been granted the permission to manufacture various products included in Schedule 'X' to the Act. It is claimed that these products are of great utility and therapeutic value to the patients. It is further claimed that the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-15-1992
Reported in : I(1994)DMC452
Amarjeet Chaudhary, J.1. Smt. Pritam Kaur, appellant, had filed the petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Court of Shri K.C. Gupta, Additional District. Judge, Ambala, who dismissed the same vide judgment dated 29.11.1988. She had sought, divorce on the ground of cruelty at the hands of her husband Gurbachan Singh respondent.2. Aggrieved against the aforesaid judgment, the appellant has preferred the present appeal.3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts regarding solemnisation of the marriage between the appellant and the respondent on 4.5.1975 according to Sikh rites at Kalka and birth of three daughters besides one son out of their wed-lock are not in dispute.4. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by the Trial Court :--1. Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty? OPP.2. Relief.5. In order to prove her case, the appellant examined PW-1 Badhawa Singh besides her o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-10-1992
Reported in : (1993)ILLJ488P& H
Harphul Singh Brar, J.1. This judgment of mine will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 843-M and 846-M of 1992, as a common question of fact is involved in these two petitions. However, for facility of reference, facts have been taken from the Criminal Miscellaneous No. 843-M of 1992.2. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashment of complaint dated October 27, 1989, under Section 85(e) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act'), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat.3. The petitioner states in his petition that he has been accused to be the principal employer of M/s. Kanishka Tyres and Tubes (Pvt.) Ltd., O/1, Industrial Area, Sonepat, in terms of Section 2(17) of the Act. It is alleged in the complaint that the accused has/have failed to submit the returns of contributions as required under Sections 39, 40(1) and 43 of the Act read with Regulation 26 of the Employees' State Insurance (General) ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-16-1992
Reported in : AIR1993P& H46
ORDER1. This judgment will dispose C.W.P. Nos. 16441 and 15313 of 1990, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein.2. The petitioners in these cases challenge the advertisement issued by the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh (in short P.G.I.) in the Indian Express of 25th November, 1990, in which certain number of seats were reserved for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes for admission to post-doctoral courses in certain super-specialities.3. By the advertisement, referred to above, applications were invited for filling 21 seats in Post-doctoral courses, as follows :--D.M.M.Ch.1.Cardiology21. Cardiovascular & Thoracic Surgery22.Clinical Pharmacology12.Neurosurgery33.Endocrinology33.Paed. Surgery14.Gastroemerology24.Plastic Surgery35.Nephrology15.Urology3Six posts, one each for D.M. courses in Cardiology, Endocrinology and Gastroente-rology and M.Ch. Courses in Neuro Surgery, Plastic Surgery and Urology were ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-16-1992
Reported in : (1992)106CTR(P& H)162; [1993]199ITR628(P& H)
Ashok Bhan, J.1. This judgment of mine shall dispose of a bunch of 174 Revision Petitions Nos. 88, 313, 483 to 490, 625, 626, 682 to 700, 727 to 731, 741 to 754, 767 to 769, 780 to 782, 831, 832, 870 to 872, 991 to 993, 1103 to 1112, 1195 to 1199 to 1204, 1284 to 1287, 1497, 1760, 1761, 1763, 1926, 1990 to 2002, 2028 to 2032, 2071 to 2088, 2187 to 2192, 2218 to 2222, 2224, 2225, 2274 to 2277, 2338, 2339, 2485, 2523, 2543, 2629, 2685, 2686, 2854, 2855, 3274 to 3279, 3285, 3413, 3414, 3444 to 3446, 3475 to 3477, 3735 to 3737, 3791, 2413 and 3626 of 1991 involving the same questions of law and facts excepting the amount of compensation being awarded to the claimants in each of the petitions. The facts are being referred to from C. R. No. 624 of 1991. The revision petition has arisen out of the following facts.2. Land belonging to the petitioners situated in the revenue estate of Bhuchho Khurd, tehsil and district Bhatinda was acquired by the Union of India for setting up a cantonment at B...
Tag this Judgment!