Total Pageviews

Sunday, March 28, 2010

2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) (SC) 1959
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Verma
Civil Appeal No. 4385 of 2009 (Arising Out of SLP (C) No.2931 of 2009)
Krishan Lal
v.
State of Haryana & Ors.
{Decided on 16/07/2009}
Service and Labour Law--Appointment--Practical Training--Post of Mechanist Grinder Instructor--Essential qualification was five years practical/teaching experience--The said period of five years, would include the period of a certificate course undergone--Respondent No.4 was an apprentice in Maruti Udyog for a period of one year --Said period must also be counted--Appointment upheld.
------------------
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 1961
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
Regular Second Appeal No.144 of 2003
Bhim Sain
v.
Kaushalya Devi alias Prem Lata & Ors.
{Decided on 20/07/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. Vikas Bahl, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Ms. Shashi Ghuman, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Will--Can be proved on basis of statement of Sub-Registrar alone without examining of attesting witnesses.
(A) Succession Law--Will--Limited Estate--Ownership--Will in favour of widow conferring limited estate--Widow has pre-existing right as property is of her husband and he is under obligation to maintain his wife--Such limited estate confined on widow under Will ripens into full ownership--Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Section 14(1). (Para 13)
(B) Succession Law--Will--Limited Estate--Ownership--Where a female Hindu acquires property by way of gift or under Will or under any other instrument or under a decree or order of the civil Court or under an award without any pre-existing right for the first time as a grant then such female shall have a limited estate under section 14 (2) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 but where a female has a pre-existing right and a right for maintenance, that limited estate will ripened into full ownership--Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Section 14(1). (Paras 9 & 11)
(C) Succession Law--Will--Execution of--Proof--Whether Will can be proved on basis of statement of Sub-Registrar alone without examining of attesting witnesses--YES--Sub-Registrar identified signature of one of attesting witness as he has been him writing and signing on various documents during his discharge of duties of sub-registrar--Sub-Registrar deposed that Will was read over and explained to testator--Both attesting witness had died--No evidence that such attesting witnesses were available but still not examined--Therefore statement of sub-registrar is sufficient to prove execution of Will--Succession Act, 1963. (Paras 14 & 15)
(D) Civil Procedure--Resjudicata--Permanent injunction--Earlier suit filed for injunction on basis of possession--There was no issue of ownership--There was no dispute that their mother was granted limited ownership in Will and she became full owner by operation by law--Present suit is injunction on basis of ownership by virtue of Will of his mother--Matter in issue in previous suit was substantially and materially different from present suit--Resjudicata not applicable--Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (Paras 18 & 20)
------------
Attar Singh v. Sher Singh
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 1967
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sabina
R.S.A. No.1587 of 2008
Attar Singh
v.
Sher Singh
{Decided on 08/07/2009}
For the Appellants: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Jagat Singh, Advocate,.
Hindu Law--Alienation--Legal Necessity--Ancestral property--Declaratory decree--Effect of--Suit for possession by way of ejectment of defendant--Earlier suit filed by plaintiff for declaration that an ancestral land sold by his father was without legal necessary decreed--It was ordered that suit property would revert to plaintiff after death of his father--Effect of declaratory decree passed in favour of reversioners is with a view to restore property alienated to estate of alienator and it is for alienee to establish to establish before Court that he had any subsisting interest in property in dispute after death of alienor--Property in dispute covered under challenge in earlier suit--Defendant failed to establish that he had any subsisting interest in suit land after death of father of plaintiff--Plaintiff had right to succeed to estate of his father subject to claim of plaintiff--Court below right decreed suit of plaintiff. (Para 10 &11)
--------------------