Total Pageviews

Saturday, March 20, 2010

Phool Patti v. Ram Singh (D) thr. Lrs.
2009(2) LAW HERALD (P&H)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. N. Mittal
Civil Revision No.6886 of 2006 (O & M)
Rajesh Chadha
v.
Satish Chaudhary
{Decided on 25/03/2009}
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. L. Sarin, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Hemant Sarin, Advocate.
For the Respondent: Mr. Amit Singh, Advocate.
Civil Procedure--Injunction--Temporary Injunction--Agreement to sell of suit property to a company along with scrap for 5 crores--Agreement stand admitted by parties--Rs. 1 crore received as earnest money--Receipt of amount on alleged cancellation of agreement not admitted by petitioner--Petitioner has made a strong prima faice case--Balance of convenience is also in favour of petitioner because he has paid huge amount of Rs.1 crore--Petitioner would suffer irreparable loss and injury if defendants are allowed to remove iron, machinery and trees from suit property or to alienate the same--Application filed by petitioner for temporary injunction allowed--|Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 39, Rule 1 and 2. (Paras 17 & 18)
------------------
Smt. Kamla Devi v. Krishan Kumar
2009(2) LAW HERALD (P&H)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.D. Anand
F.A.O. No. 49-M of 1995
Smt. Kamla Devi
v.
Krishan Kumar
{Decided on 09/03/2009}
For the Appellant : Mr. P.S.Goraya, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. B.R. Mahajan, Advocate
(A) Matrimonial Law--Divorce--Pleadings--Plea of the wife that she and her husband cohabited, as husband and wife, till the year before filing of the petition--She cannot wriggle out of that admission--|Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13. (Para 8)
(B) Matrimonial Law--Divorce--Dowry related harassment--No such allegation in earlier petition, which was dismissed in default--Such plea in present case is an after thought and not credible--Moreover, fact of earlier petition was not mentioned in her written statement--|Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13. (Para 8)
(C) Matrimonial Law--Mental Cruelty--Denial by wife of conjugal bliss to the husband would amount of mental cruelty to husband--Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13. (Para 10)
(D) Matrimonial Law--Remarriage--Divorce decree granted--Remarriage before statutory period of appeal would render second marriage to be invalid--But if appeal is filed after statutory period, second marriage would be lawful--Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13. (Para 15)
-------------------
Ram Piari and others v. State of Punjab
2009(2) LAW HERALD (P&H)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjit Singh
Civil Writ Petition No. 346 of 2009
Ram Piari
v.
State of Punjab
{Decided on 12/01/2009}
For the Petitioners: Mr. R. S. Sandhu & Mr. Harminderjit Singh, Advocates,
Revenue Law--Eviction--Non payment of rent--On issuance of notice, tenant could have deposited the rent or given proof of having already deposited the same--Tenant pleaded refusal of landlord to issue receipt--Same was not established--Order of eviction upheld--|Punjab Security of Land Revenue Act, 1953.
------------------------
Gunit Sidhu and another v. Bhai Shaminder Singh
2009(2) LAW HERALD (P&H)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mahesh Grover
R.S.A. No.696 of 2005
Gunit Sidhu
v.
Bhai Shaminder Singh (since deceased)
{Decided on 16/03/2009}
For the Appellant: Shri G.S. Nagra, Advocate
For the Respondent: Shri B.R.Mahajan, Advocate.
(A) Revenue Law--Revenue Record--Jamabandi--Presumption of truth is always attached to the jamabandies--Entries of Canal department do not have any significance over and above the revenue entries--|Punjab Land Revenue Act. (Para 16)
(B) Family Settlement--It was neither registered nor was on stamp paper--It has no evidentiary value. (Para 14)
---------------------