Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1968P& H217; 1968CriLJ775
Mehar Singh, C.J. 1-11. (After narrating facts, the judgment continues as under:--) The case then came before a Special Bench consisting of Dua. P. C. Pandit and Gurdev Singh JJ. on September 22. 1966, on which date the counsel who had been representing the petitioner reported that the petitioner had died and he was representing nobody in the case. On that the learned Judge said in their order that 'In these circumstances, we direct that notice of this case be given to the Advoratp-General so that he may assist this Court in the matter.' As the respondents ' were not present, they also issued notice to them for October 13,1986. On October 4, 1966, respondent 1 moved Criminal Miscellaneous application No. 1030 of 1906 referring to the death of the petitioner and the presence of some Judges of this Court at the funeral and then saying that 'It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that in the circumstances aforesaid, your Lordships may be pleased either to direct the counsel of the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : [1998]234ITR595(P& H)
N.K. Agrawal, J.1. The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, 'the Tribunal'), at the instance of the Department under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in cancelling the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee-firm was engaged in the business of sale of liquor under a licence. The Income-tax Officer under Section 185(1)(a) of the Act granted registration to the firm, Jagdish Chand Walia and Company, Ludhiana, for the assessment year 1977-78 on the basis of the partnership deed filed on March 31, 1977. The Commissioner of Income-tax, however, cancelled that order under Section 263 of the Act, holding that the order of the Income-tax Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.23288 of 2013 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.23288 of 2013. Reserved on :30. 1.2014 Date of decision:17. 02.2014 Shree Lakshmi Narayan Ayurvedic College ...Petitioner Vs. The Union of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE GURMEET SINGH SANDHAWALIA ***** Present: Mr. Arjun Pratap Atma Ram, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sukhdeep S. Sandhu, Sr. Standing Counsel for UOI. Mr. Puneet Kumar Bansal, Advocate for respondent no.2. None for respondent no.3. **** G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.(Oral).1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 30.8.2013 (Annexure P/6) whereby respondent no.2-the Central Council of Indian Medicine (hereinafter referred to the CCIM.) decided not to grant conditional permission for Under Graduate course (hereinafter referred to UG.) for the session 2013-14 due to the shortcomings of total number of OPD patients which were 33196 against the requirement of 36320. Challenge is also laid to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2003)133PLR563
R.L. Anand, J.1. Unsuccessful plaintiff has filed the present Civil Appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.8.1979, passed by the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Jind, who, allowed the appeal of the defendant by setting aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial Court and dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-appellant, with costs throughout.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 21.11.1974 Shri Prem Chand plaintiff advanced a cash loan of Rs. 4,000/- to Shri Chandgi Ram deceased, predecessor in interest of the defendants and in token thereof said Shri Chandgi Ram executed the Bahi entry Ex.P1 in favour of the plaintiff. The rate of interest settled was Rs. 1-9 Anna per cent per month. Chandgi Ram did not make any payment. Hence the suit.3. Chandgi Ram died during the pendency of the suit and his L.Rs were substituted as defendants.4. The defence taken by the L.Rs. that Shri Chandgi Ram never took any loan from the plaintiff nor execut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1998)144CTR(P& H)127
N. K. AGRAWAL, J. :The following question has been referred to this Court 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 was right in law in cancelling the order passed by the CIT under S. 263 of the IT Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee-firm was engaged in the business of sale of liquor under a licence. The ITO under S. 185(1)(a) of the Act granted registration to the firm, M/s Jagdish Chand Walia & Co., Ludhiana, for the asst. yr. 1977-78 on the basis of the partnership deed filed on 31st March, 1977. The CIT, however, cancelled that order under S. 263 of the Act, holding that the order of the ITO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The CIT noticed that licences to sell liquor had been actually granted by the Punjab Government in the names of three persons, Jagdish Chand Walia, Amarjit Walia and Harish Chand Walia. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.5301 of 2013 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.5301 of 2013 Date of decision:13.03.2013 Yogesh .....Petitioner versus Union of India & others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA. Present: Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner....Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J. (Oral) It has been averred that the petitioner had submitted an application for appointment to the posts of Sub Inspector (direct entry) in the Border Security Force in response to an advertisement issued by the respondent-authorities in the year 2011. it has further been pleaded that the petitioner had been permitted to participate in the various stages of selection, which included a pre-entry test, the physical test as also a medical test. Even the interview of the petitioner was conducted. The grievance of the petitioner, who claims to be a selected candidate is that an impugned show cause notice dated 19.02.2013 (Annexure P-5) has been issued in terms of wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1996P& H241
ORDERSwatantar Kumar, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by 40 students of Dehat Vikas College of Pharmacy Tigaon, District Faridabad against the judgment of learned single Judge dated 4-4-1994. Rejecting the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition.2. In order to appreciate the contentions raised in the present appeal, it will be appropriate to refer to necessary facts giving rise to this appeal. Dehat Vikas Educational Society (hereinafter referred to as the Society) registered under the Societies Registration Act established Dehat Vikas College of Pharmacy, Tigaon, District Faridabad (hereinafter referred to as the College). The Society applied for approval to the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter referred to as the Council) to start the Diploma Course in Pharmacy. The Council issued approval vide its letter dated 1-1-1992 for the academic year 1991-92. It was stated in this letter that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (1993)103PLR213
ORDERG.R. Majithia, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff has come up in regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the First appellate Court partially modifying those of the trial Judge and holding that Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit.2. The facts:- The plaintiff-appellant (hereinafter the plaintiff) was allotted land measuring 122 kanals 12 marlas daring consolidation; that mutation No. 3840 was sanctioned on April 26, 1965 by the Assistant Consolidation Officer having powers of Assistant Collector, II Grade Amritsar; that this mutation was subsequently reviewed on the ground that excess land was allotted to the plaintiff; that the plaintiff was allotted Khasra numbers 3261, 3263, 3224, 3181, 3184 and 3190 during consolidation and total area of these Khasra numbers came to 113 Kanals 7 marlas and not 122 Kanalas 12 marlas; that the plaintiff's entitlement was only for 122 Kanals 7 marlas; that the plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged the order of the revi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CRA-D No.163-DB of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA- D No.163-DB of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 28, 2014 Harwinder Singh and others ...Appellants versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH Present: Mr.Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate with Mr.Mandeep Kaushik and Mr.Vishavjit S. Virk, Advocates for the appellants. Ms.Rajni Gupta, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. *** Kuldip Singh J. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants, namely, Harwinder Singh, Davinder Singh and Guravtar Singh, challenging the judgment and order dated 05.02.2009, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Amritsar, whereby they were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and ordered to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 2,500/- each; and in default thereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. The brief facts of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
CWP No.19429 of 2003 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.19429 of 2003(O&M) Date of Decision:09. 05.2014 Director, Primary Education, Haryana Petitioner Versus Suresh Kumar and another Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH1 To be referred to the Reporters or not?.2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present:- Mr. Rahul Sharma, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate with Mr. Mohan Singh, Advocate for respondent No.1 *** Amol Rattan Singh, J.1. This petition filed by the Director, Primary Education, Haryana, assails the award of the Labour Court, U.T., Chandigarh, dated 18.12.2002, by which the claim of the respondent-workman for re- instatement in service, was allowed along with continuity of such service. 50% back-wages were also awarded, from the date of issuance of the demand notice.2. The facts of the case, as given in the petition, are that the re...
Tag this Judgment!