Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Sep-20-2005
Reported in : (2006)144PLR529
S.S. Saron, J.1. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 14.6.2005 passed by learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh, whereby leave to contest the petition filed by the tenant-respondent under Section 13-A of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (Act for short) has been granted. The landlord-petitioner assails the said order granting leave to contest.2. The petitioner filed an application under Section 13-A of the Act on 29.9.2004 seeking right to recover immediate possession of the premises in dispute on the ground that he is to retire from service of the Post & Telegraph Department 30.6.2005. Notice was issued and duly served on the respondent on 30.9.2004 for 8.11.2004. In the summons that were issued, it was mentioned that the tenant-respondent is required to get the leave to contest within a period of 15 days from the date of service of summons. The counsel for the respondent signed the power of attorney on 31.10.2004. However, since the report of the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-31-2005
Reported in : AIR2006P& H77; (2006)142PLR289
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This is defendant's appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ( for brevity 'the Code') challenging the view taken by the learned District Judge, Sangrur, in his judgment and decree dated 5.10.2001 holding that the suit of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 for specific performance of contract dated 26.10.1994 entered between the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 and defendant-appellant alongwith two others deserve to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1. It has further held that Shri Om Parkash, defendant-respondent No. 4, who is one of the share holders in the suit property, could not be considered as a lunatic or a person of unsound mind. The learned District Judge has revered the findings recorded by the trial Court in its judgment and decree dated 27.11.1998, whereby the learned trial Court had dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1.2. The case of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 as emerges from the pleadings is that La...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : May-31-2005
Reported in : (2005)196CTR(P& H)623; [2005]278ITR262(P& H)
D.K. Jain, C.J.1. Rule DB.2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we take up the matter for final disposal at this stage itself.3. The petitioner is aggrieved by order dt. 8th July, 2002, passed by the CIT, Rohtak, whereby its application dt. 16th Jan., 2002, seeking renewal of exemption under Section 80G of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), has been rejected.4. The petitioner, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, was incorporated on 22nd Feb., 1961, with the avowed objects of establishing educational institutions anywhere in India, to contribute funds to any existing or future educational institutions, universities or gurukuls and to acquire property of every description for any one or some of its objects, etc. However, subsequently in the general body meeting of the society held on 17th Sept., 1989, the memorandum and articles of the society containing the objects, were rearranged with the following new objects :'(a) To spread the te...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Apr-25-2005
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!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-28-2005
Reported in : (2005)140PLR481
M.M. Kumar, J. 1. This petitioner filed under Article 227 of the Constitution read with Sections 115 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the Code') prays for setting aside order dated 10.1.2005 (Annexure P.1) passed by the Id. Addl. District Judge Bhatinda. The plaintiff-petitioners No. 2 and 4 have filed a civil suit for declaration seeking permanent injunction against the defendant-respondents. In the suit a prayer was made for restraining Municipal Committee, Bathinda respondent N o. 8 from changing entry in the column of ownership in the House Tax Assessment Registrar regarding Building No. 4443, situated at Old Satta Bazar, Bathinda from the name of plaintiff-petitioner No. 2 to any other name. A further direction was sought restraining defendant-respondent No. 1 from alienating any portion of the house and 1/2 share of plot No. 73 situated at Sector 15-A Noida. Along with the suit an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code was also filed see...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-25-2005
Reported in : AIR2005P& H246; (2005)140PLR475
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 15.1.2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib whereby the appellant has been held guilty in proceedings under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure (for snort 'the Code') for violating the order passed by him on 5.2.1993, and has been ordered to be detained in civil prison for a period of three months.2. One Kewal Krishan, predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos. 1 to 3 filed an appeal before the District Judge against the judgment and decree dated 7.12.1992 passed by the trial court. In the appeal, he also moved an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code. While admitting the appeal on 5.2.1993, the appellate court passed an interim order restraining the respondents in the appeal, from alienating the suit land till further orders. In the meantime, Kewal Krishan aforesaid died and his legal representatives i.e. respondents Nos. 1 to 3 here...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-19-2005
Reported in : (2005)140PLR530
M.M. Kumar, J. 1. This is plaintiffs second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for brevity 'the Code') challenging concurrent findings of f acts recorded by both the Courts below. A short question that arises for consideration is as to whether the findings recorded by the Courts below on the issue concerning identity of land are vitiated on account of categorical documentary evidence in the form of mutation Ex.PW9/A which clearly establishes the identity of the suit land.2. Brief Facts One Jaggan was own and in possession as co-sharer/joint owner of the land to the extent of 1/2 share bearing Khewat No. 11-12 Khatoni No. 17-18, Rect. No. 116(013) Ghir Mumkin Abadi and Khewat No. 10 Khatoni No. 14, Rect. No. 117(1-3 Marlas) situated in village Mandhewali Tehsil Ballabgarh. He had a son named Khacheru. Jaggan suffered a judgment and a decree in his favour on 30.10.1980 (Exs.P.3 and P.4). The judgment and decree Exs.P.3 and P.4 led to sanction of mutation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-20-2005
Reported in : 2006(3)SLJ418(P& H)
Tapen Sen, J.1. This Writ Petition is directed against the award dated 15.3.2001 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Faridabad (respondent No. 1) in Reference Case No. 280 of 1994 by which he was pleased to order the instatement of the respondent No. 2 (concerned workman) together with back wages and continuity in service. The petitioner is a School. It has been stated in Paragraph 2 that initially, the concerned workman was appointed as a 'Chowkidar' on daily wages through a Contractor namely M/s. Continental Security Services, Faridabad. It has further been stated that the concerned workman, being the employee of the aforementioned M/s. Continental Security Services, remained on the job till 20.9.1993. It has also been stated that the petitioner School had received bills from the said Contractor for the service rendered by it and in terms of the bills, the petitioner School had made payments by cheques. In effect, therefore, the petitioner School st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Oct-06-2005
Reported in : [2006]129CompCas41(P& H); (2005)141PLR689
Virender Singh, J.1. This is hotly contested matter anent the post-auction jurisdiction of Company Judge to set aside a confirmed sale on the basis of a higher offer.2. The facts of the case are set down as under:Winsome Yarns Limited, (auction purchaser) through the instant appeal has impugned the order of the learned Company Judge dated 30.3,2005 whereby the confirmed auction sale has been set aside and Official Liquidator has, been directed to undertake the exercise of reauction of Lot Nos. 17, 19 and 20 of Punjab; Wireless Systems Limited (for brevity, PUNWIRE), in liquidation.The Company in liquidation namely PUN WIRE had gone into rough weather which resulted in filing of a winding up petition before the Company Judge bearing C.P. No. 226 of 1999 Under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for brevity, (he Act). The learned Company Judge appointed a provisional Liquidator vide order dated 27.72000. Thereafter, the said petition was allowed 6h 1.2.2001 and Official Liqu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-30-2005
Reported in : IV(2005)BC359; [2005]126CompCas554(P& H); (2005)140PLR462
M.M. Kumar, J.1. This order shall dispose of numerous applications filed in C.P. No. 226 of 1999 which include CA 650 of 2004, 18, 28, 72, 94, 185 and 228 and 2.005. All these applications have been filed in respect of confirmation, higher bid and other related issues connected with the sale of assets of the company in liquidation, namely, the Punjab Wireless Systems Limited (for brevity. 'PUNWIRE').2. The background facts are necessary to provide proper perspective and focus to the controversy raised in these applications. The company in liquidation, namely, PUN-WIRE had been running into rough weather which resulted in filing a winding up petition in this Court being C.P. No. 226 of 1999 under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for brevity, 'the Act'). The aforementioned petition was allowed on 1.2.2001 and the Official Liquidator was appointed the liquidator. It is pertinent to mention that before passing order dated 1.2.2001 for winding up the PUNWIRE finally, this Co...
Tag this Judgment!