Total Pageviews

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2235
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Kannan
Civil Revision No.1991 of 2001 (O&M)
Firm M/s Chanan Ram Lal Chand, Karyana Merchant & Ors.
v.
Prem Chand & Ors.
{Decided on 25/02/2009}
For the Petitioner: None.
For the Respondents-landlord: Mr. Arun Palli, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Jai Bhagwan, Advocate.
East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949--Eviction--Subletting--If a sub-lease is a ground for eviction, the prior permission granted under the contract after the contract had expired could not be pressed into service. (Para 5)
------------------
Smt. Joginder Kaur & Ors. v. Amrik Singh
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2236
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg
RSA No.2061 of 2007(O&M)
Smt. Joginder Kaur & Ors.
v.
Amrik Singh
{Decided on 14/05/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. O.P. Hoshiarpuri, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate.
(A) Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.63--Agreement to sell--Since the possession was proved not to have been delivered to the plaintiff-respondent at the time of execution of the impugned agreement to sell. (Para 16)
(B) Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.63--Agreement to sell--Merely on the basis of recital in the document, possession cannot be said to be proved to be delivered--Inference of fact from the recitals or contents of a document is a question of fact. (Para 16)
------------------
Sarwan Singh v. Gram Panchayat village Sarhal Mundi & Ors.
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2239
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Garg
CR No.1368 of 2009
Sarwan Singh
v.
Gram Panchayat village Sarhal Mundi & Ors.
{Decided on 10/03/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate.
(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.18, R.3--Rebuttal evidence--While closing his evidence, the petitioner had not reserved his right to lead evidence after closure of evidence by the defendant-respondents. In rebuttal the plaintiff can lead evidence only to the issues the burden of proof which was on the defendants.--In the present case, the petitioner has failed to point out the issues or the evidence led by the defendants, to which he wants to produce rebuttal evidence--Order disallowing petition to lead evidence upheld. (Para 7)
(B) Civil Procedure Code, 1908--Scope of--No doubt, the provisions of CPC are handmaid for the administration of justice; however, the same cannot be construed so liberally that it may result into putting the other party to a disadvantage. (Para 7)
------------------