Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.17785 of 2012 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.17785 of 2012 Reserved on:28. 05.2014 Date of decision:11. 07.2014 M/s. IAA Hospital Pvt. Ltd. and another ...Petitioner(s) Versus The Authorized Officer, UCO Bank and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr. Manish Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Anupam Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with Ms. Nandini Nanda, Advocate, and Mr. Gautam Pathania, Advocate, for respondent No.1-UCO Bank. Mr. Karan Khehar, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. Mr. Sudhir Pruthi, Advocate, for respondent No.4.1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. Yes 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.1. The present judgment shall dispose of 3 writ petitions i.e. CWP Nos. 17785, 14741 and 15248 of 2012 since common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. The facts are being taken from CWP No.177...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1975P& H246
Muni Lal Verma, J.1.The question which has been referred by the Division Bench to us for decision, reads thus :--'Whether the mere fact that according to the particular practice prevailing in the High Court before the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Mahant Bikram Das Chela Mahant Lachhman Dass Mahant, Amritsar v. Financial Commr. Revenue, Punjab, Chandigarh, (1974) 76 Pun LR 451 = (AIR 1975 Punj & Har 1) (FB) (supra) Letters Patent Appeals were entertained by the office contrary to the requirements of Rule 3 of Chapter 2-C of Volume V of the Rules and Orders of the High Court without being accompanied by three sets of spare paper-books, and time, was allowed to file the same, and for filing the copies even beyond the expiry of the period of limitation the appeals were entertained and admitted does or does not in law constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeals which were filed before the judgment of the Full Bench.'2. The circumsta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1969P& H25
Tuli, J. 1. Shrimati Dassi, wife of Dhani Ram, respondent filed a petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for divorce on the ground that her husband was living in adultery with one Shrimati Reoti. The learned trial Court granted to the petitioner a decree for divorce against her husband with costs on 24th January 1962. Against that decree, Dhani Ram filed an appeal which was accepted by D.K. Mahajan j., on 8th March, 1963, and the petition of Shrimati Dassi was dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs throughout.2. Shrimati Dassi, feeling aggrieved from the judgment of D.K. Mahajan, J. has filed this Letters Patent Appeal.3. Shri M.C. Sood, learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that the Letters Patent Appeal is not maintainable as it is not provided in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter called the Act). There is no merit in this objection. Section 19 of the Act provides:'Every petition under this Act shall be presen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CRM No.M-26714 of 2012(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-26714 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision:-25.4.2014 Amit Thaman ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for Mr.Ashwani Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Amarjit Kaur Khurana, Addl. AG Punjab for the State. Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.(Oral) The matrix of the facts & material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the instant petition for the grant of concession of regular bail filed by the petitioner and emanating from the record is that on 28.6.2012, the Investigating Officer received a secret information to the effect that the petitioner, by taking benefit of his medical store, used to illegally sell the intoxicating tablets, capsules and bottles of drugs to the students, including the young girls. If a raid is conducted immediately, he can be apprehended with large quanti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2010)157PLR304
Gurdev Singh, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 28.4.2008 passed by learned Rent Controller, Ludhiana, vide which he dismissed the application filed by the petitioner-landlord under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC for amendment of the ejectment application.2. The facts relevant for the disposal of the present revision are that the petitioner filed ejectment application against the respondents tenants for their ejectment from the shop in dispute forming portion of property bearing Unit No. 432/98 situated at Noor-wala Road, Ludhiana, on the ground on non-payment of rent. During the pendency of that ejectment application, he filed application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC read with Section 151 CPC for amendment thereof so as to add the following Para:(iii) That the petitioner urgently and bonafidely requires the property in dispute for the start of laboratory which is very much necessary for the petitioner as the patients are suffering heavily on account of their rep...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CRM not M-17772 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (221) CRM not M-17772 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:31. 07.2013. Gurdavinder Singh and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Deep Singh, DAG, Punjab. **** SABINA, J. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the FIR No.28 dated 07.05.2011 under Sections 342, 343, 344 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC).registered at Police Station Kambo, District Amritsar Rural and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the FIR in question has been registered on the basis of secret information that the petitioners were running unauthorized de- addiction center in the name and style of Navjeevan Drug Sandeep Sethi 2013.08.05 10:39 I ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1995)111PLR445
G.C. Garg, J.1. This order will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions 4993 of 1985; 126, 127, 128, 202, 232, 427 and 2975 of 1980; 5248, 5249, 5363, 5364, 5365, 5366, 5367, 5368 and 1569 of 1982; 189 of 1983; 661 and 4943 of 1984 and 5771 of 1987. Petitioners in this bunch of twenty-one writ petitions are registered dealers within the meaning of Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter called as 'Punjab Act'). The main controversy raised in these writ petitions is common, namely, whether sugarcane purchased by the petitioners directly from the growers thereof is subject to levy of purchase tax under the Punjab Act.2. The petitioners are the Sugar Mills and are engaged in the manufacture of sugar. They purchase sugar-cane, an agricultural produce from the growers thereof directly, Gunny bags purchased by the petitioners are used as packing material for sugar and are sold with sugar. Some other stores are also purchased which are required to carry on the business. Unserviceable stores a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 2005(1)SLJ186(P& H)
Viney Mittal, J.1. Respondent No. 2, Ram Karan (hereinafter referred to as the 'workman') was employed as a Technician in the Philadelphia Mission Hospital, Ambala City (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner-management'), He joined his services with effect from September 15, 1978. His services were terminated on June 19, 1996. It was claimed by the workman that throughout his employment, his work and conduct had remained good and without any sort of blot or blemish and that the petitioner-management had terminated his services illegally, unlawfully and without any reasons. He further claimed that no charge sheet was served upon him and no enquiry was held. No opportunity of personal hearing was afforded to the workman. Terming the aforesaid order as illegal, null and void, unconstitutional and contrary to the principles of natural justice, the respondent-workman raised an industrial dispute by serving a demand notice dated September 17,1996 under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1985P& H43
1. This is defendants' appeal against whom the suit for declaration and the grant of the permanent injunction has been decreed by the trial Court.2. The plaintiff Chetan Dev. proprietor, M/s. Ahuja Thread Mills, filed the suit for a declaration to the effect that the alleged infringement to which the threats of the defendants towards the plaintiff relate, was, in fact, not the infringement of any legal rights of the defendants, and permanent injunction restraining them from continuing their threats towards the plaintiff and desisting therefrom. It was alleged by the plaintiff that he was the sole proprietor of M/s. Ahuja Thread Mills, and dealt with the manufacture and sale of threads for the last more than two years while the defendants were the manufacturers and representatives of M/s. Madura Coats Ltd., also dealing with the sale of threads. It was also alleged that the plaintiff, about two years ago, manufactured thread with the trade mark 'Swastik Super-shine 50' with the insignia...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2005)IIILLJ628P& H
ORDERM.M. Kumar, J.1. This order shall dispose of C.W.P.Nos. 2267 and 2289 of 1988. Both the petitions are directed against the award dated August 7, 1987 (Annexure P.1) passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Chandigarh. The first petition has been filed by the Employees Union of Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (for brevity 'PGI Union') and the second petition has been filed by the P.G.I. (for brevity 'the Management'). The Industrial Tribunal vide its award has held that the strike w.e.f. January 16, 1980 to February 3, 1980 although conformed to the provisions of Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for brevity 'the Act') yet it was not justified. On sympathetic consideration, the Tribunal has awarded 25 per cent of back wages for the strike period. Various other demands of the PGI Union have also been considered and certain directions have been issued.2. Brief facts of the case are that on September 9, 1980, the PGI Union served a demand notice whic...
Tag this Judgment!