Total Pageviews

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Mohinder Singh v. Sohan Singh Sethi
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2102
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Kannan
Civil Revision No.2127 of 2008 (O&M)
Mohinder Singh
v.
Sohan Singh Sethi
{Decided on 16/04/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. Vikas Mohan Gupta, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. D.S. Nalwa, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
NRI Landlord--Person born in erstwhile India at Rawalpindi (now in Pakistan) and later shifted to U.K., would be a person of Indian origin because at the time of his birth it was part of India
(A) Rent Law--NRI Landlord--Person born in erstwhile India at Rawalpindi (now in Pakistan) and later shifted to U.K., would be a person of Indian origin because at the time of his birth it was part of India--East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Section 13-B. (Para 3 and 4)
(B) Rent Law--Eviction--If different portion of one integrated building has been let out to different tenants then all the tenants could be evicted--East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Section 13-B. (Para 5)
(C) Rent Law--Eviction--Two shops--Once the requirement of both the shops was established by the disclosure of a proposal to erect the shopping complex-cum-residence and the fact that one portion of the building had become available even before filing of the petition would not be a factor to discount the requirement of the landlord--East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, Section 13-B. (Para 5)
--------------
Jatinder Kaur & Anr. v. Jaskirat Kaur
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2104
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain
FAO No.2524 of 2007
Jatinder Kaur & Anr.
v.
Jaskirat Kaur & Ors.
{Decided on 25/02/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. S.C. Chhabra, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.1: Mr. Sandeep Khungar, Advocate.
For the Respondents No.2 and 3: None.
For the Respondent No.4: Mr. Sardevinder Goyal, Advocate.
Succession Law--Certificate of Succession--Appeal against order--Suit was decided by Civil Judge (Senior Division) who was delegate of District Judge--Appeal would lie before District Judge and not before High Court--Succession Act, 1928, Section 372, 384 and 388. (Para 5)
-------------------
Smt. Sarla Singh v. Kr. Ajay Partap Singh
2009(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) 2106
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vinod K. Sharma
FAO No. 72-M of 1998
Smt. Sarla Singh
v.
Kr. Ajay Partap Singh
{Decided on 28/07/2009}
For the Appellant: Mr. Arun Jain, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Dheeraj Chawla, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Permanent alimony--Right of residence--Wife besides maintenance is also entitled to right of residence with equal status as that of husband-
Permanent alimony--Calculation of Income--Not only the disposable income of a spouse in the year of preceding the making of the order, is to be considered but also the earnings in the previous years and probable earnings in the future--Court is also to look into the position and the status of parties and in absence of any reliable data on the point of income
(A) Matrimonial Law---Permanent alimony--Husband from well known Jamidar family which had income of Rs.50,000/- in year 1942--Husband employed as senior executive in a company in pune and owned a flat of 800 sq. feet at pune--Even if conservative approach is adopted property of husband cannot be less than worth Rs.2 crore--Husband having number of properties beside being capable of holding high position as per his qualifications--Keeping in view of assets of husband his income if cannot be assessed less than Rs.1.5 lacs per month---Wife entitled to Rs.40,000/- p.m. alongwith right of residence as maintenance towards permanent alimony or in alternative a sum of Rs. 1 crore as one time alimony which would not represent even 1/10 of property owned by husband--Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 25--Marriage Law (Amendment) Act, 1956. (Paras 33-36)
(B) Matrimonial Law---Permanent alimony--Right of residence--Wife besides maintenance is also entitled to right of residence with equal status as that of husband--Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 25. (Para 36)
(C) Matrimonial Law---Permanent alimony--Calculation of Income--In estimating the amount of permanent alimony or permanent maintenance, the Court, while dealing with the fact of income, is not to focus its attention only on the disposable income of a spouse in the year of preceding the making of the order, but would also normally have regard to the earnings in the previous years and probable earnings in the future--Court is also to look into the position and the status of parties and in absence of any reliable data on the point of income, the Court is to take into consideration overall financial position of the spouses and their necessities having regards not merely to their income but their properties, debts and liabilities--Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 25. (Para 32)
--------------