Total Pageviews

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Davinder Singh v. Attro & Ors.
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2381
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sabina
R.S.A.No. 3008 of 2009(O&M)
Davinder Singh
v.
Attro & Ors.
{Decided on 13/08/2009}
For the Appellant: Ms. Avinash Mandla, Advocate.
Succession Act, 1925, S.63--Will--Execution of--Validity--Unregistered Will--Attesting witness deposed that Will was got registered but Will placed on record was unregistered document--Natural heir disinterested without any justifiable cause--As per appellant he was 17-18 years at time of adoption which is not valid adoption--Signature of marginal witness not available is register maintained by deed writer--No explanation to why will in question was thumb marked whereas executor used to affix his signatures at time of receipt of pension--Moreover, original Will not placed on record--Patwari to whom will was handed over not examined--Held; That Will in question is not genuine document. (P.7,8, 9 & 10)
----------------
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) (DB) 2385
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
(DIVISION BENCH)
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, Chief Justice
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
CWP No. 274 of 2006
Lawyers for Human Rights International
v.
State of Punjab & Ors.
{Decided on 15/05/2009}
Present: Mr. Navkiran Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. H.S. Mattewal, Advocate General, Punjab, with
Mr. Amol Rattan Singh, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. D.V. Sharma, Senior Advocate, with
Mr. Harit Sharma, Advocate, for PUDA.
Mr. O.S. Batalvi, Advocate, for Union of India.
Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate.
Mr. S.C. Nagpal, Advocate.
Constitution of India--Encroachment--Public Interest litigation--Encroachment at Lands of high ranked officers on Land owned by proprietor of village--Such proprietors do not satisfy description of categories for which public interest litigation can be invoked--Neither they are poor nor economically or socially backward--There is effective remedy available under law to affected persons--The fact whether the vendors were forced to execute power of attorneys and/or the sale deeds and the power of attorneys are forged and fabricated documents, cannot be examined in the present proceedings as such disputed questions of fact can only be examined, before a proper forum and after associating the vendees (P. 13 & 14)
--------------
Kurali Toll Bridge Co.Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2390
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur, C.J.
Arbitration Case No.51 of 2008
Kurali Toll Bridge Co.Pvt. Ltd.
v.
State of Punjab & Ors.
{Decided on 12/08/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. P.S.Rana, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rupinder Khosla, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
For Union of India: Mr. Ashwinie Kumar Bansal, Standing Counsel.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, S.11(6)--Appointment of arbitrator--Petition for--Failure of respondent to nominate Arbitrator till filing of petition--Would result in forfeiture of their right to do so--Court can appoint an arbitrator--Appointment of sole Arbitrator would not only ensure that there is no further delay in constitution of Arbitral Tribunal but reduce expenses in arbitration proceedings--Former Chief Justice of India appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon dispute between parties. (P.13 & 15)
------------------------------------------------------------