1
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jul-07-1998
Reported in : (1998)120PLR666
H.S. Bedi, J.1. The petitioner is presently working as Senior Architect in the Department of Architecture of the Haryana Government. She fell ill in June 1996. The Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, (hereinafter referred to as the PGI) diagnosed her illness as Hairy Cell Leukemia. She remained admitted in the P.G.I, for some time in July and August, 1996. The doctors in the P.G.I, prescribed a course of medicines for the petitioner and accordingly issued an Essentially Certificate (Annexure P-2) certifying that Interfron-A, a very expensive medicine, which had to be administered to her periodically was not available in the stock of the P.G.I, and had to be purchased from outside. The P.G.I, also issued a certificate (Annexure P-3) that as the petitioner's treatment was going to be a prolonged one, the dose of medication was likely to be in the range of Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- per month. The petitioner accordingly put in an application for the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-17-1998
Reported in : (1999)122PLR628
Swatanter Kumar, J.1. This application under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code has been filed by the applicant with a prayer that they be awarded a sum of Rs. 60,000/- per acre for the acquisition of their land in terms of order dated 24.5.1990. passed in RFA No. 1186 of 1988 Arjan and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.2. Notice of this application was issued to the respondent, who filed a detailed reply to the application. On merits of the case, they raised objection to the very maintainability of the application in the present form.3. The applicants contended that in the interest of justice and to award equal compensation to the applicants, as has been granted to the other claimants, whose land was acquired by the same notification, compensation prayed for should be granted to them. On the other hand, it is contended by the respondent that the application is an abuse of process of law and if any remedy was available to the applicants in the present case, it was by filing a Letters P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-07-1998
Reported in : (1998)145CTR(P& H)332; [1999]236ITR620(P& H)
N.K. Agrawal, J.1. The following question relating to the asst. yr. 1972-73 has been referred by the Tribunal, Chandigarh, at the instance of the Department, under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has been in error in holding that no capital gains arose to Harbhagwan in relation to his individual assessment for the asst. yr. 1972-73 by holding that HUF of Lala Harbhagwan was the last previous owner of the plots at Mall Road, Karnal, in terms of s. 49(1) of the IT Act, 1961, as applicable to the relevant assessment year 2. The assessee, in the status of an individual, was assessed for the asst. yr. 1972-73 under s. 143(3) of the Act. Accounting year of the assessee ended on 7th September, 1971. The assessment was, however, set aside by the AAC and the case was remanded to the AO. Thereafter, assessment was reframed by the AO, adding a sum of Rs. 6,623 as capital gains as a protective measure....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-16-1998
Reported in : AIR1998P& H146
ORDERJawahar Lal Gupta, J.1. The petitioner questions the election of Mr. Ramesh Chander to the Punjab Legislature from the Dasuya Assembly Constituency. He prays that the election be annulled and that he be declared to have been duly elected,2. The election was held on February 7, 1997. The counting of the ballot papers was conducted on February 9, 1997 at J. C. DAV College, Dasuya. The result was declared in the early hours of the morning on February 10, 1997. Respondent No. 1 was declared elected by a margin of 53 votes. The petitioner alleges that various irregularities had been committed by the Returning Officer and the counting staff. Consequently, an application for rechecking and recounting the ballot papers had been submitted. This request was not properly considered. Respondent No. 1 was wrongly declared elected. The petitioner prays that the votes be recounted and thereafter, he be declared to have been elected.3. Notice of the election petition was issued to all the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-31-1998
Reported in : AIR1998P& H254; (1998)120PLR495
N.K. Agrawal, J.1. This is second appeal by defendant No. 2, Lt. Col. Jaswant Singh against the judgments and decrees of Sub Judge, Amritsar, and Additional District Judge, Amritsar.2. Plaintiff Daljit Singh filed a civil suit for specific performance on 24-10-1980 in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, Amritsar, against (i) Improvement Trust, Amritsar (since dissolved and now represented by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, (ii) Lt. Col, Jaswant Singh, and (iii) Sukhdev Singh. Plaintiff sought specific performance of agreement dated 25-8-1970 in respect of a residential plot of land, No. 119, Green Avenue, Amritsar. During the course of trial, the learned Sub Judge passed an order on 4-6-1981 directing the parties to keep the property in status quo condition regarding possession, construction and transfer. Issues were framed and evidence of the parties was recorded. The suit was decreed on 3-11-1987. In appeal, filed by defendant No. 2, the judgment and decree of the tr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-07-1998
Reported in : (1999)121PLR88
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. These petitions have been filed to quash the orders passed by the Assistant Estate Officer, Union Territory, Chandigarh, cancelling the lease of residential sites allotted to the petitioners and forfeiting 10% of the premium plus ground rent and interest.2. Since the issues of fact and law which arise for adjudication in these cases are similar, we are deciding them by a common order.3. Petitioner Smt. Geeta Devi, whose land was acquired by the respondents for Capital Project after 1.1.1966, applied for allotment of residential plot under the scheme known as 'The Chandigarh Allotment of Sites on Lease-hold basis to the Oustees of Chandigarh Scheme, 1972' (hereinafter referred to as the 1972 Scheme), by stating that she did not own a house or plot in Chandigarh either in her own name or in the name of any dependent family member. Her application was accepted by the administration and she was allotted site No. 2273(P), Sector 44-C, Chandigarh vide memo dated 13.1.1992....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-21-1998
Reported in : (1998)118PLR765
Swatanter Kumar, J.1. The provisions of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure were amended to introduce a proviso to limit and control the scope of revisional jurisdiction of the High Court. Clause (a) to proviso to Sub-section (i) of Section 115 provided that the High Court would not vary or reverse any order in the course of suit or other proceedings except where it finally disposes of the suit or other proceedings. While Clause (b) of the proviso to the same Sub-section provided that if the order passed would occasion failure of justice or cause irreparable injury to a party against whom such an order is made, then the High Court could exercise its revisional jurisdiction. The effect and scope of these limitations on the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court is the precise question that falls for determination in the present case.2. Before adverting myself to the legal controversy it may be appropriate to refer to the necessary facts giving rise to the present petition. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-12-1998
Reported in : (1999)IILLJ28P& H; (1998)119PLR105
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. This is a petition by the workman to quash the award dated February 22, 1998 passed by the Labour Court, Ambala, upholding the termination of his services. 2. The facts necessary for deciding whether or not the impugned award should be quashed on the ground that it suffers from an error of law are that while he was working as conductor and was posted under the respondent No. 2 a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner on the allegation of allowing 4 passengers to travel from Panipat to Haridwar without tickets and thereby causing loss of Rs. 45.60 to the Government. On the basis of the finding recorded by the Enquiry Officer holding him guilty of mis-conduct alleged against him, the respondent No. 3 ordered the petitioner's dismissal from services. This gave rise to an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court, Ambala for adjudication. The petitioner challenged his dismissal from service on the ground of violation of the principles o...
Tag this Judgment!