Thursday, June 24, 2010

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

S.156(3)--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.420, 406, 323, 506--Cheating--FIR--Cancellation Report--Complaint--Order was placed for purchase of chemicals and solvents from accused--Complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to respondent no.4 and he in turn signed a demand promissory note by way of security confirmation and acknowledgment of liability and repayment guarantee--Dispute is civil in nature--Merely because material was not supplied per se would not indicate commission of offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust--Complaint dismissed.; J.C. Khanna v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 840
S.401--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Dishonour of Cheque--Conviction--Revision--Compromise--Parties settled matter between themselves--Complainant no more interested in prosecuting petitioner/accused--He prayed for extension of necessary benefit to petitioner on account of an amicable settlement--Under these circumstances permission granted to complainant to compound offence with petitioner/accused--Petitioner/accused acquitted of charge.; Jasbir Kaur v. Dalbir Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 879
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.406, 498-A & 506--Quashing of FIR--Compromise--Allegations in FIR arising out of matrimonial dispute which is purely personal in nature--Matter compromised amicable between parties--Parties happily staying together in separate rented house--FIR under Section 406, 498-A and 506 quashed in interest of justice--2007(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) (FB) 2225 relied.; Sunil Kumar Joshi & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 841
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A, 406 and 506--Quashing of FIR--Demand of dowry--Marriage of complainant was solemnized 3-4 years before lodging FIR--Complainant has a daughter aged 2 years--FIR recites that complainant has been living in her parental home and accused have not accepted her in matrimonial home since birth of daughter--FIR does not disclose entrustment of property to either of petitioners specifically or dishonest misappropriation of the property--No specific allegations made in regard to commission of offence under Section 498-A IPC--Cognizance of commission of offence is not spelt out from FIR or from averments made in reply filed on behalf of investigating agency as against petitioners--FIR qua petitioners quashed.; Mohinder Kaur & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 805
S.482--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Quashing of Complaint--Dishonour of Cheque--Cheque issued by ‘S’ for payment of instalment of electricity bills dishonoured--Allegation against petitioner that he assured that cheque will be honoured when presented for payment--Offence under Section 138 will be made out only against drawer of cheque--Petitioner being not drawer or signatory of cheque in dispute cannot be held liable for conviction under Section 138--Complaint qua petitioner quashed.; Mukesh Kumar v. Punjab State Electricity Board, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 807
S.482--Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995, S. 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 14 (1), 15, 18 and 21, 36--Quashing of FIR--Petitioner executed three sale deeds out of share held by him in joint property--Individually petitioner has not sold land beyond permissible limit of 1,000/- sq. meter--FIR and framing of charge under Section 36 qua petitioner quashed.; Tara Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 811

Civil Procedure Code, 1908

O.17, R.1--Closing evidence by Court order--Proviso of order 17 Rule 1 lays down that not more than three opportunities should be granted to party to lead evidence, yet aforesaid rule of procedure cannot be said inflexible or mandatory--Defendants granted 4 opportunities for their evidence before closing evidence by order of Court--Held; that end of justice would be met if one more opportunity is granted to lead evidence at his own responsibility subject to payment Rs.5000/- as cost because otherwise impugned order would be very harsh on petitioner as it would be a case of no evidence led by defendants.; Puran Chand alias Raju v. Gopal Krishan & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 878

IMPORTANT POINTS

Alteration of Charge--Trial Court has to consider and dispose of application moved by complainant order section 216 in light of evidence available on record. 943
Ancestral Property--A sole surviving coparcener is entitled to dispose of co-parcenary property as it was his separate property 905
Conscious Possession--When accused was sitting over jute bag until it is proved that he knew it well that there was poppy husk stored in the bag, no conscious possession can be inferred. 937
Dishonour of cheque--Complaint by partnership firm--Who can file--In partnership firm each partner’s act on behalf of firm is valid--No specific authorisation is required for partner to file a complaint. 882
Dishonour of cheque--Service of Notice--Presumption--Once notice has been sent by registered post with acknowledgement due in a correct address, it must be presumed that the service has been made effective. 882
Expert evidence--Comparison of thumb impression--Opinion of expert--Divergent view--Where divergent opinion of experts are available on record then court can prefer one which is more logical and well reasoned. 926
Mortgage--Usufructuary Mortgage--Custodian had every jurisdiction to accept redemption--Appellant who claims to be in possession of property being member of scheduled castes has no locus or right to challenge redemption of mortgage. 949
Reinstatement-- Rule of ‘first come, last go’ could be deviated by the employer in cases of lack of efficiency or loss of confidence-But burden is on the employer to justify deviation. 891
Reinstatement--For attracting the applicability of Section 25-G of the Act, the workman is not required to prove that he had worked for a period of 240 days during twelve calendar months preceding the termination of his service and it is sufficient for him to plead and prove that while effecting retrenchment, the employer violated the rule of ‘last come first go’ without any tangible reason. 891
Temporary Injunction--Joint Land--Parties are in joint possession of suit land--Partition proceedings are pending--Defendants/appellants cannot be permitted to raise construction on joint land without partition--Temporary injunction rightly granted in favour of plaintiff-respondent.

IMPORTANT POINTS

Accident--Rash and Negligent Driving--Prosecution case that bus hit three-wheeler from behind--Eye-witness account is contrary to report given by mechanic which indicates only a scratch at back side--Driver of bus acquitted. 737
Agreement to sell--Specific Performance--Court can ask for specific performance of part of contract. 753
Agreement to sell--Trial Court declined relief of specific performance of agreement by simply observing that value of property has since increased and that original owner of suit land has already died--Not sufficient grounds for declining relief for specific performance of agreement. 731
Agreement to sell--Unless there is a ground for declining the relief of specific performance of the agreement, ordinarily the Courts would exercise discretion in favour of ordering specific performance of the agreement. 731
Bail--Murder--Attempt to murder--Petitioners not attributed any role in FIR--However in statement before trial Court they have alleged to have armed with weapon--But no injury caused by them--They have been in custody for last one years and two months--Bail granted. 736
Bail--Murder--First version by way of DDR does not implicate anybody--FIR lodged after delay of 10 days--Extra judicial confession made by petitioner, wife of deceased after 7 months of lodging FIR--No definite opinion in regard to any homicidal act--Bail granted. 760
Cheating--Misappropriation of funds--Chit fund business--Accused--Running chit fund business--Accused misappropriated amount of prize money of subscribers for their personal use and gain--A wrongful loss was caused with dishonest intention on part of accused--Conviction upheld. 776
Court Fee--Plaintiff has camouflaged its claim by making prayer for settlement of account only but in fact plaintiff is seeking recovery of amount found due. 763
Court Fee--Plaintiff paid deficit court fee within time granted in first instance by trail Court as required by Order 7, Rule 11(c)--Plaint could not be rejected on ground of deficit Court fee. 748
Culpable homicide--Accused in agitated state merely pushed deceased resulting into his fall in chemical tank--Cannot be said that he had any intention to kill--Case is covered under Section exception 4 of Section 300 IPC. 758
Dishonour of Cheque--Appeal against acquittal--Leave to file--There was no legal liability at time of issuance of cheque by accused in favour of complainant--Cheque given as security to get sale deed executed--Accused is not liable under provisions of Section 138 of N.I. Act 724
Divorce by mutual consent--Grant of divorce by way of mutual consent when continuing consent was not available which is sine qua non for passing a decree of divorce under Section 13-B--Is liable to be set aside. 782
Dowry Articles--Custody of dowry article after death of woman--Husband even if he is acquitted of charge under section 304-B could not retain dowry articles on death of her wife. 799
East Punjab Holdings--Mandatory provision of proviso to Section 42 violated--Therefore, Civil Court has jurisdiction notwithstanding bar of jurisdiction created under Section 44. 742
Ejectment--Non-payment of Rent--Execution of rent note proved--Non production of account books by landlord have no significance--Ejectment ordered. 734
Ejectment--Non-payment of Rent--Rate of Rent--Inspector who conducted survey for purpose of assessment of house fax not examined at trial--Entry in house tax assessment record cannot relied for rate of rent. 734
Illegal gratification--Acquittal--Material discrepancy in testimony of PW8 (DSP vigilance) and PW9 (Official independent witness) regarding recovery of tainted money from appellant--Discrepancy cannot be treated a minor discrepancy but is a major discrepancy which makes prosecution story doubtful especially when complainant and shadow witness have not supported prosecution case--Accused acquitted. 779
Illegal gratification--Acquittal--Tempering with nip parcels--MHC in whose custody nips had remained had not been examined--Link evidence missing. 779
Narcotics--Conscious Possession--Merely because appellant was sitting on bags ispo facto would not be enough to hold conscious possession over bags. 791
Witness--Once testimony of witnesses aspire confidence documents not necessary for corroboration. 776
-------------

IMPORTANT POINTS

Adverse Possession--Mere non-payment of rent will not put an end to relationship of landlord and tenant so as to declare possession to be open and hostile to true owner. 828
Adverse Possession--Plea of adverse possession cannot be raised by filing suit for declaration by a person who pleads uninterrupted possession. 828
Adverse Possession--Plea of ownership and adverse possession cannot co-exits. 828
Allotment of plot--Additional price--Demand Notice--Bar of Civil Court jurisdiction --Question, whether demand raised is factually justified or not would not make demand notice null and void--There is significant difference between an action being wrong and an action being null and void--Impugned demand notice cannot said to be null and void--Jurisdiction of Civil Court to try suit is barred by Section 50 of HUDA Act. 802
Cheating--Merely because material was not supplied per se would not indicate commission of offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust--Complaint quashed. 840
Compensation--Appellant to whom vehicle was allegedly transferred by way of execution of document though not registered with Registering Authority not liable to bear compensation payable on account of accident in question. 842
Culpable homicide--Sudden fight--In case of free fight every accused is individually liable for injury caused by him. 849
Dishonour of Cheque--Quashing of Complaint--Petitioner being not drawer or signatory of cheque in dispute cannot be held liable for conviction under Section 138--Complaint qua petitioner quashed. 807
Dying declaration--Statement made by deceased inculpating accused after having been tutored, prompted and instigated by members of her family from parents side who were present there--In such circumstances, dying declaration cannot constitute sole basis for recording conviction. 846
Ejectment--Bonafide Necessity--Respondent is practicing advocate and is recently married--Claim of respondent for being in occupation of tenanted premises in his own right and on part of his parents to settle him independently not unnatural. 817
Land Acquisition--Notification--Simultaneous notifications under Section 4 r/w S.17 and under Section 6 r/w 17 on same day cannot be published. 860
Octroi Duty--Imposition of--Only sale within the municipal limit does not authorize the municipality to charge octroi on goods--Octroi can be levied and charged when sale of octrioable is made in the octroi area for the purpose of consumption and use within the octroi area--If a person purchases goods to be consumed beyond the octroi area then no octroi can be levied. 825
Quashing of FIR--Demand of dowry--FIR recites that complainant has been living in her parental home and accused have not accepted her in matrimonial home since birth of daughter--FIR does not disclose entrustment of property to either of petitioners specifically or dishonest misappropriation of the property--No specific allegations made in regard to commission of offence under Section 498-A IPC--FIR qua petitioners quashed. 805
Rash and Negligent Driving--Proof of rashness or negligence are sine qua non for proving commission of an offence under Section 304-A. 875

Words and Phrases

Octroi--Means a cess without a refund on entry into city or municipality of goods for consumption, use or sale.; Dabur India Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 825

Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994

S.20(1)--Election of Gram Panchayat--Disqualification--Respondent no.1 removed from post of Sarpanch--Respondent no.1 not debarred from contesting any election much less for any fixed period.; Jaswant Singh v. Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal (A.D.C.), Hoshiarpur & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 853
S.76--Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994, S.208(1)(o)--Election of Gram Panchayat--Disqualification--Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (Act of 1994) is later in time than Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (Act)--Disqualification mentioned in Section 208 of Act would not be operative in face of disqualification provided under Section 11 of Act of 1994 unless and until they both are consistent.; Jaswant Singh v. Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal (A.D.C.), Hoshiarpur & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 853

Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994

S.208(1)(o)--Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994, S.76--Election of Gram Panchayat--Disqualification--Punjab State Election Commission Act, 1994 (Act of 1994) is later in time than Punjab Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (Act)--Disqualification mentioned in Section 208 of Act would not be operative in face of disqualification provided under Section 11 of Act of 1994 unless and until they both are consistent.; Jaswant Singh v. Presiding Officer, Election Tribunal (A.D.C.), Hoshiarpur & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 853

Punjab Municipal Act, 1911

Octroi Duty--Imposition of--Only sale within the municipal limit does not authorize the municipality to charge octroi on goods--Octroi can be levied and charged when sale of octrioable is made in the octroi area for the purpose of consumption and use within the octroi area--If a person purchases goods to be consumed beyond the octroi area then no octroi can be levied.; Dabur India Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 825
Octroi Duty--No finding recorded on question as to whether goods/products sold were to be consumed or used within municipal unit of Zirakpur--Impugned order quashed--Matter remanded to Appellate Authority for fresh decision in view of observation made by Apex Court in Tata Engineering’s case and Indian Oil Corporation’s case.; Dabur India Ltd. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 825

Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995

S.3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 14 (1), 15, 18 and 21, 36--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of FIR--Petitioner executed three sale deeds out of share held by him in joint property--Individually petitioner has not sold land beyond permissible limit of 1,000/- sq. meter--FIR and framing of charge under Section 36 qua petitioner quashed.; Tara Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 811

Punjab Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961

S.8--Land Acquisition Act, 1894--Acquisition of Land--Public Purpose--For expanding existing market yard--Acquisition of land for public purpose is within domain of state--What area should be acquired and what area should be left out of acquisition is no concern of Courts--Prohibition to establish market yard for purchase and sale of any agricultural produced imposed on other agencies and bodies were Municipal Committee, Panchayat Samities, Panchayat or local authorities and not on State Government to establish any other sub market yard or principal yard.; Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 872

Saturday, June 19, 2010

Succession Act, 1925

S.63--Evidence Act, 1872, S.68 & 69--Will--Execution of--Proof--Only attesting witness of Will examined did not support Will as he only admitted his signatures on Will but in cross-examination admitted that he never visited place where Will was executed--Scribe also did not produce any scribe register to prove presence of witness or executant at time of registration of Will--Moreover, different dates shown on different pages was a suspicious circumstance which plaintiff failed to explain or dispel--Plaintiff failed to prove execution of Will--Learned Courts below justified in non-suiting plaintiff.; Shugan Chand v. Bachni Devi & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 835

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

S.138--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of Complaint--Dishonour of Cheque--Cheque issued by ‘S’ for payment of instalment of electricity bills dishonoured--Allegation against petitioner that he assured that cheque will be honoured when presented for payment--Offence under Section 138 will be made out only against drawer of cheque--Petitioner being not drawer or signatory of cheque in dispute cannot be held liable for conviction under Section 138--Complaint qua petitioner quashed.; Mukesh Kumar v. Punjab State Electricity Board ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 807

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

S.55 & 25--Conscious Possession--Acquittal--Recovery of 9 gunny bags of poppy husk--Conscious possession of appellant qua recovered poppy husk bags not established by prosecution--Appellant who would have been charged alternatively for transporting offensive goods without permit not charged under relevant section--Appellants acquitted.; Gurnam Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 857

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

Compensation--Release of amount of compensation awarded deposited in fixed deposits declined observing that alleged necessity of petitioner for higher education is not substantiated by any document--Is illegal and non sustainable--As per award amount has to be released to petitioner on attaining age of majority even if he had no immediate necessity for amount--Impugned order set aside--Amount of fixed deposit of petitioner including accused interest ordered to be released.; Tarun Chabbra v. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karnal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 880
Compensation--Transfer of Vehicle--Liability to bear compensation--Fact that respondent no.2 was registered owner of vehicle in question at time of accident admitted--Truck in question was taken on superdari from police custody after accident by respondent no.2 claiming himself to be owner of vehicle--From facts on record it cannot be said that sale of vehicle as claimed by respondent no.2 was complete in all respects except transfer of ownership in record with Registering Authority--Held; that appellant to whom vehicle was allegedly transferred by way of execution of document though not registered with Registering Authority not liable to bear compensation payable on account of accident in question.; Sham Sunder v. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 842
S.163-A--Claim Petition--Maintainability of--Claim by claimant that deceased was of 40 years at time of death and used to earn around Rs.18,000/- p.m. from agriculture and diary farming--Section 163-A of Act is special provision particular for class of persons whose income is Rs.40,000/- p.a.--Person with higher income cannot scale down his income to claim benefit under Section 163-A--Claim petition rightly dismissed being not maintainable.; Mithlesh & others v. Satbir Singh & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 838
S.166--Compensation--Denial of--Accident took place in front of college at 9.30 a.m. when there is heavy rush and traffic--Claimant, who was student neither taken to hospital nor college authorities informed about accident--No MCR recorded--Claimant failed to connect injury with accident--Story put by claimant not believable--He could not claim compensation.; Sudesh v. Virender Singh & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 822

Limitation Act, 1963

S.27--Adverse Possession--Facts which are necessary to be pleaded and proved when plea of adverse possession is raised laid down by Apex Court after analyzing law in Hemaji Waghaji Jat vs. Bhikabhai Khengarbhai Harijan & Ors. discussed.; Jeet Singh (since deceased) through L.Rs. v. Molu Ram (since deceased) through L.Rs., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 828
S.27--Adverse Possession--Whether mere non-payment of rent would put to an end to relationship of landlord and tenant so as to assert hostile possession in favour of a person who claims adverse possession--No--Mere non-payment of rent will not put an end to relationship of landlord and tenant so as to declare possession to be open and hostile to true owner.; Jeet Singh through L.Rs. v. Molu Ram (since deceased) through L.Rs., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 828
S.27--Adverse Possession--Whether plea of adverse possession can be raised by filing suit for declaration by a person who pleads uninterrupted possession--No--Plea of adverse possession is available only as defence.; Jeet Singh (since deceased) through L.Rs. v. Molu Ram (since deceased) through L.Rs., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 828
S.27--Adverse Possession--Whether plea of adverse possession can be accepted in absence of particulars regarding possession becoming upon and hostile to true owner--No--In absence of particulars regarding it becoming hostile and open such a plea cannot be answered--Plea of ownership and adverse possession cannot co-exits.; Jeet Singh (since deceased) through L.Rs. v. Molu Ram (since deceased) through L.Rs., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 828

Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Punjab Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1961, S.8--Acquisition of Land--Public Purpose--For expanding existing market yard--Acquisition of land for public purpose is within domain of state--What area should be acquired and what area should be left out of acquisition is no concern of Courts--Prohibition to establish market yard for purchase and sale of any agricultural produced imposed on other agencies and bodies were Municipal Committee, Panchayat Samities, Panchayat or local authorities and not on State Government to establish any other sub market yard or principal yard.; Sanjeev Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 872
S.4 r/w S.17 and S.6 r/w S.17--Notification--Quashing of--Simultaneous notifications under Section 4 r/w S.17 and under Section 6 r/w 17 on same day cannot be published--Notifications liable to be set aside.; Gurdip Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 860

Insecticides Act, 1968

S.3(k) (i), 17, 18, 29 & 33--Insecticide Rules, 1971, R.27(5)--Quashing of complaint--Misbranding of sample--Sample of insecticide taken from original packing by Insecticide Inspector--Nothing on record that insecticide of which sample was drawn was not stored in same state--Sample not tempered with--Petitioner being dealer/distributor cannot be held liable--Complaint qua petitioner quashed.; Ramesh Kumar & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 810
S.30(3)--Misbranding--If sample is taken from the original packing of the manufacturer and stored for sale in the same condition, the dealer/distributor is entitled to get protection under Section 30(3) of the Act, if the substance/sample drawn was in its original condition.; Ramesh Kumar v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 810

Insecticide Rules, 1971

R.27(5)--Insecticides Act, 1968, S. 3(k) (i), 17, 18, 29 & 33--Quashing of complaint--Misbranding of sample--Sample of insecticide taken from original packing by Insecticide Inspector--Nothing on record that insecticide of which sample was drawn was not stored in same state--Sample not tempered with--Petitioner being dealer/distributor cannot be held liable--Complaint qua petitioner quashed.; Ramesh Kumar & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 810

Haryana Urban Development Act, 1977

S.50--Bar of Civil Court jurisdiction--Allotment of plot--Additional price--Demand Notice--As per terms and conditions of allotment letter defendants had right to demand additional amount on enhancement of price of acquired land--Question, whether demand raised is factually justified or not would not make demand notice null and void--There is significant difference between an action being wrong and an action being null and void--Impugned demand notice cannot said to be null and void--Jurisdiction of Civil Court to try suit is barred by Section 50 of HUDA Act--Plaintiff shall be at liberty to challenge impugned demand notices as per remedies available to them.; Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula & Anr. v. Suresh Chhokar & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 802

Indian Penal Code, 1860

S.34--Common Intention--Common intention and knowledge are two different things--Intention can be shared but knowledge is personal.; Jaspal Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 849
S.279 and 304-A--Rash and Negligent Driving--Proof of rashness or negligence are sine qua non for proving commission of an offence under Section 304-A.; Roshan Singh v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 875
S.302/34--Evidence Act, 1872, S.32--Murder--Dying declaration--Evidentiary value of--Death by burning--Deceased and accused (husband) married in the year 1990--No previous allegation of being harassed or treated with cruelty by accused or members of his family--Statement made by deceased inculpating accused after having been tutored, prompted and instigated by members of her family from parents side who were present there--In such circumstances, dying declaration can not constitute sole basis for recording conviction of accused in absence of any other reliable and trustworthy corroborative evidence--Accused acquitted giving benefit of doubt.; Satpal Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 845
S.304, Part I, r/w 34--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S. 323--Culpable homicide--Sudden fight--Fight had take place regarding possession over land left by river--Occurrence was result of without any pre-mediation on spur of moment--Finding of trial court that two appellants shared common intention and knowledge with other accused who gave fatal blow to deceased liable to set aside--Common intention and knowledge are two different things--Intention can be shared but knowledge is personal--Conviction of appellant under Section 304 Part I r/w 34 set aside--They are held liable for their individual act which fall under S.323.; Jaspal Singh v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 849
S.304, Part I--Culpable homicide--Conviction--Sentence--Reduction of--Occurrence took place on 23.4.1994--Appellant already suffered protracted trial of about 16 years--Appellant had suffered 11 injuries on his hand and is suffering from disability on his hand--Taking into consideration protracted trial and mitigating circumstances sentence of appellant reduced from 10 years to 6 years R.I.; Jaspal Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 849
S.304, Part II and 323--Culpable Homicide--Acquittal--Hurt--Testimony of eyewitnesses and complainant surfaced that accused was empty handed--Accused and deceased had grappled with each other--Accused had given fist blows and deceased had died--No external mark of injury--All vital organs of body found health--Though alcohol was present in blood it can be given as cause of death--Possibility of death being natural death cannot be ruled out--Once prosecution failed to prove that death of deceased was homicide, accused cannot be convicted for culpable homicide not amounting to murder--Accused acquitted of offence under Section 304-Part II--However, accused had caused fist blows, offence under Section 323 made out--Accused sentenced to 1 year R.I.; Swinder Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 814
S.304-A and 337--Rash and Negligent Driving--Acquittal--Neither investigating officer examined nor any site plan of place of occurrence proved by examining draftsman--No evidence that accused were driving vehicle in rash and negligent manner--Prosecution failed to prove identity of driver--Accused acquitted. ; Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 819
S.304-A--Rash and Negligent Driving--Four wheeler was coming on road on its correct side and turned towards right side to go to village--Scooter driven by deceased struck four wheeler on conductor side in cabin--It means four wheeler had almost taken turn and scooteris struck against left side of four wheeler--Solitary testimony of eyewitness uncorroborated qua negligence of accused--Moreover delay in lodging FIR further contributes to concoction in prosecution version--Material improvement in statement of eyewitness regarding identification of accused--Identification of accused never conducted by police--Both Courts could not make proper observations with regard to negligence of accused--No sufficient evidence found to make sure if accused was driving vehicle at time of accident benefit would go to accused--Accused acquitted.; Roshan Singh v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 875
S.306--Dowry Death--Abetment to Suicide--Death by hanging--Both complainant and accused were not belonging to affluent section of society--Demand of dowry first time made on 6.7.1996--Date of marriage was 21.6.1992--Relationship of accused husband with other women before marriage was cause of discord--Deceased would not accept the fact that his husband was having relations with any woman before marriage--It can be safely inferred that there is reason which prompted deceased to commit suicide--Once demand of dowry is ruled out offence under Section 304-A not made out--Death had taken place with in 7 years--Husband could not make his wife adjust and understand that life before marriage is not going to make difference and he had buried his past--Section 113-A of Evidence Act cause presumption that deceased was subjected to cruelty--Therefore, offence under Section 306 IPC alone made out against husband--Conviction of husband for offence under Section 304-B set aside--However, husband found guilty of offence under Section 306 IPC and sentenced to 5 years R.I.; Mohinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 863
S.307 r/w S.34--Attempt to murder--Delay in FIR--Acquittal--Occurrence had taken place on 10.5.1994 at 11.30 P.M.--Case registered at 6.05 P.M. on 11.5.1994--FIR recorded after 18 hours of incident--As per FIR one arm of injured was caught hold by appellant and other arm by his son who was acquitted giving benefit of doubt--Other son of appellant who caused injury died against whom substantive charge for offence under Section 307 was framed--Appellant caused no injury in occurrence--He was only stated to have raised lalkara--Taking delay into consideration and fact that witness improved their version in Court benefit of doubt is granted to appellant--Appellant acquitted.; Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 855
S.323--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S. 304, Part I, r/w 34--Culpable homicide--Sudden fight--Fight had take place regarding possession over land left by river--Occurrence was result of without any pre-mediation on spur of moment--Finding of trial court that two appellants shared common intention and knowledge with other accused who gave fatal blow to deceased liable to set aside--Common intention and knowledge are two different things--Intention can be shared but knowledge is personal--Conviction of appellant under Section 304 Part I r/w 34 set aside--They are held liable for their individual act which fall under Section 323.; Jaspal Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 849
S.354 and 306--Abetment to Suicide--Outrage modesty of a woman--Conviction--Wife of complainant committed suicide by consuming poison due to attempt made by accused to outrage her modesty--Accused and complainant (husband of deceased) and PW-4 are collaterals--Taking benefit of fact that complainant had gone to mourn death of mother of another collateral accused went to their house and outrage modesty of deceased--Relations between parties were cordial--Complainant disclosed the incident to PW-4 next door neighbourer next morning--Complainant did not told any thing to anybody on next day on cremation--When he returned from cremation his wife had consumed poison--Contention that complainant did not gave information immediately to anybody cannot be used to brush aside his testimony--Conduct of complainant natural, probable and convicting--Conviction upheld--However, taking into consideration that accused suffered mental pain and agony of protracted trial for 13 years sentence awarded reduced from 4 years to 3 year R.I.; Sukhdev Singh alias Sewa v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 867
S.406, 498-A & 506--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of FIR--Compromise--Allegations in FIR arising out of matrimonial dispute which is purely personal in nature--Matter compromised amicable between parties--Parties happily staying together in separate rented house--FIR under Section 406, 498-A and 506 quashed in interest of justice--2007(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) (FB) 2225 relied.; Sunil Kumar Joshi & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 841
S.420, 406, 323, 506--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.156(3)--Cheating--FIR--Cancellation Report--Complaint--Order was placed for purchase of chemicals and solvents from accused--Complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to respondent no.4 and he in turn signed a demand promissory note by way of security confirmation and acknowledgment of liability and repayment guarantee--Dispute is civil in nature--Merely because material was not supplied per se would not indicate commission of offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust--Complaint dismissed.; J.C. Khanna v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 840
S.498-A, 406 and 506--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of FIR--Demand of dowry--Marriage of complainant was solemnized 3-4 years before lodging FIR--Complainant has a daughter aged 2 years--FIR recites that complainant has been living in her parental home and accused have not accepted her in matrimonial home since birth of daughter--FIR does not disclose entrustment of property to either of petitioners specifically or dishonest misappropriation of the property--No specific allegations made in regard to commission of offence under Section 498-A IPC--Cognizance of commission of offence is not spelt out from FIR or from averments made in reply filed on behalf of investigating agency as against petitioners--FIR qua petitioners quashed.; Mohinder Kaur & Ors. v. State of Punjab ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 805

Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

S.12--Custody of minor--Violation of undertaking given in Court--Consequences--Petitioner-mother took ad-interim custody of minor by winning sympathy for four days--But she abused the same and instead of handing over back custody of minor child retained custody for more than five weeks thereafter instead of four days only--Petitioner is guilty of violating undertaking given in the Court--She is liable to be proceeded against for committing Contempt of Court--However taking sympathetic view of mental state of mother of minor no cost is imposed--Petitioner directed to handover custody immediately to respondent-father today itself. ; Brijesh alias Arzoo v. Raj Kumar Mann, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 801

Evidence Act, 1872

S.32--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302/34--Murder--Dying declaration--Evidentiary value of--Death by burning--Deceased and accused (husband) married in the year 1990--No previous allegation of being harassed or treated with cruelty by accused or members of his family--Statement made by deceased inculpating accused after having been tutored, prompted and instigated by members of her family from parents side who were present there--In such circumstances, dying declaration can not constitute sole basis for recording conviction of accused in absence of any other reliable and trustworthy corroborative evidence--Accused acquitted giving benefit of doubt.; Satpal Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 845

East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949

S.13--Ejectment--Bonafide Necessity--Respondent and his parents made purchase of tenanted premises--Respondent is practicing advocate and is recently married--Claim of respondent for being in occupation of tenanted premises in his own right and on part of his parents to settle him independently not unnatural--Ejectment upheld. ; DR. Pawan Kumar Bansal v. Gaurav Garg & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 817
S.13--Ejectment--Co-owner--Petition filed by co-owner--Other co-owner never objected to maintainability of ejectment petition--Eviction petition is maintainable.; DR. Pawan Kumar Bansal v. Gaurav Garg ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 817
S.13--Ejectment--Non payment of Rent--Tenant denied existence of relationship of landlord-tenant--Rent Controller recorded findings in favour of landlord on part of existence of relationship--No justification to grant of opportunity to tenant to deposit arrears of rent.; DR. Pawan Kumar Bansal v. Gaurav Garg & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 817

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973

S.156(3)--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.420, 406, 323, 506--Cheating--FIR--Cancellation Report--Complaint--Order was placed for purchase of chemicals and solvents from accused--Complainant paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to respondent no.4 and he in turn signed a demand promissory note by way of security confirmation and acknowledgment of liability and repayment guarantee--Dispute is civil in nature--Merely because material was not supplied per se would not indicate commission of offence of cheating or criminal breach of trust--Complaint dismissed.; J.C. Khanna v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 840
S.401--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Dishonour of Cheque--Conviction--Revision--Compromise--Parties settled matter between themselves--Complainant no more interested in prosecuting petitioner/accused--He prayed for extension of necessary benefit to petitioner on account of an amicable settlement--Under these circumstances permission granted to complainant to compound offence with petitioner/accused--Petitioner/accused acquitted of charge.; Jasbir Kaur v. Dalbir Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 879
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.406, 498-A & 506--Quashing of FIR--Compromise--Allegations in FIR arising out of matrimonial dispute which is purely personal in nature--Matter compromised amicable between parties--Parties happily staying together in separate rented house--FIR under Section 406, 498-A and 506 quashed in interest of justice--2007(3) LAW HERALD (P&H) (FB) 2225 relied.; Sunil Kumar Joshi & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 841
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.498-A, 406 and 506--Quashing of FIR--Demand of dowry--Marriage of complainant was solemnized 3-4 years before lodging FIR--Complainant has a daughter aged 2 years--FIR recites that complainant has been living in her parental home and accused have not accepted her in matrimonial home since birth of daughter--FIR does not disclose entrustment of property to either of petitioners specifically or dishonest misappropriation of the property--No specific allegations made in regard to commission of offence under Section 498-A IPC--Cognizance of commission of offence is not spelt out from FIR or from averments made in reply filed on behalf of investigating agency as against petitioners--FIR qua petitioners quashed.; Mohinder Kaur & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 805
S.482--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Quashing of Complaint--Dishonour of Cheque--Cheque issued by ‘S’ for payment of instalment of electricity bills dishonoured--Allegation against petitioner that he assured that cheque will be honoured when presented for payment--Offence under Section 138 will be made out only against drawer of cheque--Petitioner being not drawer or signatory of cheque in dispute cannot be held liable for conviction under Section 138--Complaint qua petitioner quashed.; Mukesh Kumar v. Punjab State Electricity Board, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 807
S.482--Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995, S. 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 14 (1), 15, 18 and 21, 36--Quashing of FIR--Petitioner executed three sale deeds out of share held by him in joint property--Individually petitioner has not sold land beyond permissible limit of 1,000/- sq. meter--FIR and framing of charge under Section 36 qua petitioner quashed.; Tara Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 811

Civil Procedure Code, 1908

O.17, R.1--Closing evidence by Court order--Proviso of order 17 Rule 1 lays down that not more than three opportunities should be granted to party to lead evidence, yet aforesaid rule of procedure cannot be said inflexible or mandatory--Defendants granted 4 opportunities for their evidence before closing evidence by order of Court--Held; that end of justice would be met if one more opportunity is granted to lead evidence at his own responsibility subject to payment Rs.5000/- as cost because otherwise impugned order would be very harsh on petitioner as it would be a case of no evidence led by defendants.; Puran Chand alias Raju v. Gopal Krishan & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 878

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963

Agreement to sell--Specific Performance--Alternative Relief--Money decree--Execution of agreement to sell and receipt of earnest money of Rs.3,25,000/- proved--Condition in agreement that if vendor backed out from agreement and refused to execute sale deed in favour of vendee then he will be entitled to receive double amount of earnest money--Money decree passed by appellate Court of Rs.5,20,000/- (3,25,000/-as earnest money and Rs.1,95,000/- as damages) not harsh and against any law--Moreover, vendor not taken plea of hardship but simple plea of denial of execution of agreement to sell taken up--No interference.; Harcharan Singh v. Sohan Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 739
Agreement to sell--Specific performance--Discretionary relief--Relief of specific performance of agreement to sell is a discretionary relief and the discretion has to be exercised on the basis of sound judicial principles--Unless there is a ground for declining the relief of specific performance of the agreement, ordinarily the Courts would exercise discretion in favour of ordering specific performance of the agreement--Equity, justice and good conscience demand that the agreements, which have been entered into between the parties, should be honoured--If relief of specific performance of the agreement is declined without any reason, the very purpose of entering into agreement would be frustrated.; Smt. Raj Kanwar v. Gharsi Ram through LRs, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 731
Specific Performance--Agreement to sell--Trial Court declined relief of specific performance of agreement by simply observing that value of property has since increased and that original owner of suit land has already died--Not sufficient grounds for declining relief for specific performance of agreement--Plaintiff agreed to purchase suit land to earn profit in case of increase in price--Said benefit cannot be declined without any valid reason--Plaintiff paid more than 90% of agreed sale price to vendor--Plaintiff remained deprived of amount as well as fruits of possession of suit land for more than a decade since date of agreement--No reason to decline relief of specific performance of agreement--Suit for possession by specific performance of agreement decreed.; Smt. Raj Kanwar v. Gharsi Ram through LRs, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 731
S.12 & 20--Agreement to sell--Specific Performance of part of contract--Question with regard to relief of declaration being included in suit for specific performance not raised before Courts below--Plea even not taken by vendor appellant that he cannot execute a decree of 2.2 kanals of land as he has left with only to extent of 1.15 marla and therefore agreement to sell in question has become inequitable--However, vendee specifically mentioned about previous sales and that vendor concealed this fact from him and executed agreement to sell--Held; that Court can ask for specific performance of part of contract.; Manmohan Singh v. Hakam Singh etc., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 753

SERVICE LAW

Service Law--Promotion--To post of Deputy General Manger--Respondent No.7 who was junior to petitioner promoted on 20.8.2007 when he was not in requisite pay scale for promotion--Denial of promotion to petitioner when a junior is promoted is definitely actionable--However, petitioner cannot compare himself to position of respondents no.4 and 5 who have earned higher scale earlier to petitioner and placed higher on seniority--Petitioner is entitled to promotion w.e.f. 20.8.2007 when his junior was promoted--He is also entitled to all monetary benefits attended to on such promotion.; R.S. Rana v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 756

SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT, 1989

S.3(1)(x) (xi)--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.323/506--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of complaint--Allegations of commission of offence under S.C. and S.T. are not made out--Complaint filed not for reason that petitioner has committed an offence rather with some ulterior motive--There was some dispute in regard to path--Both sides were trying to take possession of that path--In malafide exercise Criminal complaint filed so as to pressurize petitioner in matter of possession of the path--This is when on repeated complaints and three enquiries investigation agency concluded that no offence under S.C. and S.T. Act had been committed--Factum of conclusion drawn by police authorities or enquires intentionally not disclosed in complaint--In such circumstance, continuance of these proceedings shall result in abuse of process of Court--Complaint quashed.; Dilbagh Singh & Ors. v. Sukhjinder Kaur, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 729

PUNJAB EXCISE ACT

S.61(1)--Distilling illicit liquor--Conviction--Release on probation--Petitioner suffered mental agony and pain of protracted trial for 14 years--He was aged 22-23 years when he has convicted--He has committed no other offence in last 14 years--Taking in consideration age and antecedents of petitioner ends of justice will be met in case petitioner is released on probation for period of one year.; Gurdeep Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 797

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT RULES AND ORDER

Volume I, Chapter I, Part B--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.100(3), O.41, Rule 2 & 3--Memorandum of Appeal--Rejection of--Amendment after admission of appeal--Memo of appeal not containing substantial question of law as required under Section 100(3) of C.P.C.--Rule 10 of Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders provides that application under Rule 2, Order 41 CPC, ought to have been moved prior to date fixed for hearing appeal--No such application filed under Order 41, Rule 2 despite the fact that appeal is pending since 1982 and Supreme Court judgment in Kulwant Kaur’s case came in 2001--Adjournment of appeal enabling appellant to move amendment application declined--Memo of appeal rejected under Rule 3 Order 41 C.P.C.; Rajinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 722

PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988

S.7 & 13(2)--Illegal gratification--Acquittal--Material discrepancy in testimony of PW8 (DSP vigilance) and PW9 (Official independent witness) regarding recovery of tainted money from appellant--PW8 categorically deposed that one currency note of Rs.500/- and three currency notes of denomination of Rs.100/- each and fourteen currency notes of denomination of Rs.50/- each were recovered from pocket of shirt of appellant--However, PW-9 deposed that all currency notes which were recovered from pocket of shirt of appellant were of denomination of Rs.500/- each--PW-9 is witness who had tallied number of currency notes with numbers already noted down in a memo--In these circumstances this discrepancy cannot be treated a minor discrepancy but is a major discrepancy which makes prosecution story doubtful especially when complainant and shadow witness have not supported prosecution case--Accused liable to be acquitted.; Ramesh Chander v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 779
S.7 & 13(2)--Illegal gratification--Acquittal--Tempering with nip parcels--Solutions of hand wash and shirt pocket wash of appellant were put in sealed nips--As per PW-8 he had handed over said nips to MHC on date of recovery--PW-3, constable disposed that on 22.9.1997 he had been handed over two nips in question by MHC for depositing same in FSL--However, MHC in whose custody nips had remained from 11.9.1997 to 22.9.1997 had not been examined--In these circumstances, link evidence was missing and there was every possibility of tempering with nip parcels during this period--Absence of link evidence in facts and circumstances of case gains significance as complainant and shadow witnesses have not supported prosecution case--Accused liable to be acquitted of charge framed against him as prosecution had failed to prove its case against appellant beyond shadow of reasonable doubt.; Ramesh Chander v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 779

Friday, June 18, 2010

WORDS AND PHRASES

Words and Phrases--Bhat--Customary gifts from maternal side.; Mohinder & Anr. v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 769

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

S.4--Pronote--Receipt--Suit for recovery--Plaintiff examined marginal witness of receipt and scribe of pronote and receipt who corroborated plaintiff version--DW2 corroborates plaintiffs version that defendant had taken loan of Rs.8000/- and executed pronote and receipt--Finding of fact by Courts below that defendant borrowed Rs.28,000/- from plaintiff and executed impugned pronote and receipt--No interference. ; Bikkar Singh v. Jeet Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 748
S.138--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.378(4)--Dishonour of Cheque--Security Cheque--Appeal against acquittal--Leave to file--There was no legal liability at time of issuance of cheque by accused in favour of complainant--Cheque given as security to get sale deed executed--Accused is not liable under provisions of Section 138 of N.I. Act--Trial Court given sound reasons while acquitting accused--No ground made out to grant leave to file an appeal against acquittal.; Satinder Kumar v. Gurvinder Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 724

NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985

S.15--Contraband--Conscious Possession--Recovery of 5 bags of poppy husk each containing 30 kgs.--Place of recovery was open and accessible to all--No efforts made to ascertain ownership of place of recovery--Merely because accused was sitting on bags ipso facto would not enough to hold conscious possession over bags--Prosecution failed to establish conscious possession of appellant qua recovery of poppy husk--Accused acquitted.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790
S.15--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.313--Contraband--Acquittal--Recovery of 5 bags of poppy husk each containing 30 kgs.--Affidavits of carrier of sample parcels as well as MHC with whom case property was deposited was not put to accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.--Cannot be looked into evidence against him--Link evidence is missing--Appellant acquitted.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790

MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988

S.173--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.41, R.27--Accident--Compensation--Liability of Insurance Company--Additional Evidence--Valid driving licence--Driving Licence allowed to taken on record by way of additional evidence--Insurance Company got licence verified from Licencing Authority--Driver of offending vehicle had valid driving licence at time of accident--Impugned part of award granting recovery rights to insurance company set aside.; Dinesh Kumar & Anr. v. Smt. Roshni Devi & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 750

LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (REGULATION OF SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION) ORDER, 1993

R.7(d)--Essential Commodities Act, 1955, S.7--Acquittal--Accused prosecuted for charging excess price for LPG--Complainant no where explained that Rs.330 was charged in excess for price of cylinder--Neither any official of oil company nor any officer of Food and Supplies Department examined to explain as to what was actual price of gas cylinder--In absence of such evidence it would be difficult to say that Rs.330 were charged as excess price of gas cylinders particularly when it not case of prosecution that only gas cylinder was sold--Accused had sold connection which consists of gas cylinder, regulator, refilling charges etc.--No definite evidence has come to prove that Rs.330/- were paid extra by complainant--Accused acquitted.; Kala Devi v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 794

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

S.279 and 338--Motor Accident--Rash and Negligent Driving--Acquittal--Prosecution case consistent to the fact that bus hit three-wheeler from behind--Report given after mechanical examination of three-wheeler indicates only a scratch at back side which in opinion of PW-9, mechanic who is an expert witness examined by prosecution was not possible on account of accident at instance of bus--Eye-witness account is contrary to account given by mechanic, PW-9--If bus could not have hit three-wheeler from behind as opined incident as stated in prosecution case was not possible--Prosecution failed to prove that driver of bus committed offence as alleged--Driver of bus acquitted.; Ishwar Singh v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 737
S.302, 201, 120-B & 34--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439--Bail--Murder--First version by way of DDR does not implicate anybody--FIR lodged after delay of 10 days--Extra judicial confession made by petitioner, wife of deceased after 7 months of lodging FIR--Two of accused left out by prosecution from array of accused--As per medico legal report deceased used to consumption of heavy quantity of alcohol--No definite opinion in regard to any homicidal act--None of witnesses recorded--Bail granted.; Sanjay & Gandhi v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 760
S.302, 304 Part II--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304, Part- II--Evidence Act, 1872, S.32--Murder--Dying declaration--Deceased specifically stated that accused pushed him into chemical tank--No enmity to falsely implicate accused--Statement free from suspicion, tutoring or prompting and being truthful worthy of full evidence--Learned trial Court rightly relied on dying declaration to record finding that accused caused death of deceased--However, in view of fact that accused in agitated state merely pushed deceased resulting into fall in chemical tank, it cannot be said that he had intention to kill--Held; that case is covered under exception 4 of Section 300 IPC--Accused is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder--Conviction of accused under Section 302 set aside--He is convicted under Section 304, Part II--In view of his having undergone more than 4 years of imprisonment sentence modified to period already undergone.; Rajneesh Pandey v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 757
S.302, 307, 323, 148, 149, 120-B--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439--Arms Act,1959 S.25 & 27--Bail--Murder--Attempt to murder--Petitioners not attributed any role in FIR--However in statement before trial Court they have alleged to have armed with weapon--But no injury caused by them--Keeping in view role attributed to petitioners in occurrence and fact that they have been in custody for last one year and two months and also that trial in the case is likely to take time it would be just expedient to grant concession of bail.; Harphool Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 736
S.304, Part- II--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 304 Part II--Evidence Act, 1872, S.32--Murder--Dying declaration--Deceased specifically stated that accused pushed him into chemical tank--No enmity to falsely implicate accused--Statement free from suspicion, tutoring or prompting and being truthful worthy of full evidence--Learned trial Court rightly relied on dying declaration to record finding that accused caused death of deceased--However, in view of fact that accused in agitated state merely pushed deceased resulting into fall in chemical tank, it cannot be said that he had intention to kill--Held; that case is covered under exception 4 of Section 300 IPC--Accused is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder--Conviction of accused under Section 302 set aside--He is convicted under Section 304, Part II--In view of his having undergone more than 4 years of imprisonment sentence modified to period already undergone.; Rajneesh Pandey v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 757
S.304-B--Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, S.6(3)--Dowry Death--Custody of dowry article after death of woman--Whether husband even if he is acquitted of charge under section 304-B IPC could retain dowry articles on death of her wife--Held No.; Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 799
S.304-B--Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, S.6(3)--Dowry Death--Custody of dowry article after death of a woman--Deceased died within 7 years of marriage--She died an unnatural death other than normal circumstances--Her husband acquitted of charge under Section 304-B IPC giving benefit of doubt--Dowry article which is in custody of appellant, father of deceased shall remain in his custody--Application of husband for cancellation of superdari in favour of appellant dismissed.; Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 799
S.307--Attempt to murder--Conviction--Complainant, PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 including two other suffered injuries--Complainant party arrived at village of accused for handing over Bhat (customary gifts from maternal side) in marriage for daughter of their sister--They would be last persons to falsely implicate accused--Trial Court already acquitted four accused giving benefit of doubt--Five persons from complainant party were injured in occurrence whereas on side of accused only two persons were injured--Injuries on accused persons are abrasion, complain of pain and simple in nature--Seat of injury is on non-vital parts of body--Accused not entitled to right of self defence from number and nature of injuries--Offence under Section 307 made out--Conviction upheld--However, in interest of justice sentence reduced from 5 years to 3 years R.I.; Mohinder & Anr. v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 769
S.323/506--Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, S.3(1)(x) (xi)--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Quashing of complaint--Allegations of commission of offence under S.C. and S.T. are not made out--Complaint filed not for reason that petitioner has committed an offence rather with some ulterior motive--There was some dispute in regard to path--Both sides were trying to take possession of that path--In malafide exercise Criminal complaint filed so as to pressurize petitioner in matter of possession of the path--This is when on repeated complaints and three enquiries investigation agency concluded that no offence under S.C. and S.T. Act had been committed--Factum of conclusion drawn by police authorities or enquires intentionally not disclosed in complaint--In such circumstance, continuance of these proceedings shall result in abuse of process of Court--Complaint quashed.; Dilbagh Singh & Ors. v. Sukhjinder Kaur, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 729
S.366 and 376--Kidnapping--Rape--Prosecutrix was 16 years, 10 months and 27 days on date of occurrence--Testimony of prosecutrix reveal that she had herself left house and had met accused in Bazar--From there she accompanied accused in auto-rickshaw to bus stand where tickets were purchased--She herself boarded the bus--There was police post at bus stand and number of persons were also roaming at bus stand--Prosecutrix had not made complaint to anybody--She not raised any grievance in bus also--She remained in house of accused for three days--From conduct of prosecutrix it can be safely concluded that she herself had accompanied appellant and she had consented for sexual intercourse--No offence under Section 376 made out against appellant--However prosecutrix was less than 18 years of age--She was taken away from lawful custody of her parents--Therefore offence under Section 363 and 366 IPC made out--Conviction and sentence under Section 376 set aside but conviction and sentence under Section 363 and 366 maintained.; Dinesh v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 787
S.376 and 452--Rape--House Trespass--Acquittal--Delay in lodging FIR--Occurrence had taken place on 28.4.99 at 6.30 P.M.--Report lodged on next day on 29.4.99 at 10.00 A.M.--To explain delay it was stated that talks of compromise were going on--No person from Panchayat examined--Further, prosecutrix stated that when door was opened villagers were standing out side--But nobody from village examined--From circumstances, contention that performance of sexual intercourse was due to consent seem probable--Appellant acquitted by giving benefit of doubt.; Jafar Iqbal v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 765
S.406, 420 & 120-B--Cheating--Misappropriation of funds--Chit fund business--Accused running chit fund business--Accused misappropriated amount of prize money of subscriber for their personal use and gain--Grievance of complainant that he has been cheated to tune of Rs.15,000/- by accused--Witnesses, who are also subscribers in categoric terms stated that they paid amount on promise made by accused and when they demanded amount back it was refused--Entrustment is proved--Offence under Section 406 IPC made out against accused--Witnesses were made to understand that scheme was approved by RBI--Offence under Section 420 IPC also made out--A wrongful loss was caused to witnesses with dishonest intention on part of accused--Once testimony of witnesses aspire confidence documents not necessary for corroboration--Conviction upheld--However, since accused suffered mental pain and agony of 27 years of protracted trial sentence of two years reduced to nine months.; Varinder Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 776
S.420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.482--Cheating--Quashing--Allegation that accused no. 1 to 6 in collusion with each other got sale deed executed and registered in favour of accused no.2 in regard to land that had already gifted to complainant and her son by her father-in-law--Accused no.2 witnessed sale deeds although he was in full knowledge of gift deeds since time of their execution and registration--Considering nature of allegations, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. evidence cannot be taken by way of affidavit to disprove facts alleged in complaint--Petitioner would have right to lead evidence in defence to negate allegations--In view of disputed facts no grounds for quashing impugned complaint and summoning order made out.; Paramjit Singh v. State Of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 746

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955

S.13-B--Divorce by mutual consent--Only one of parties (husband) had appeared on date, petition was fixed after expiry of statutory period of six months after recording their initial statements at time of presentation of petition--Grant of divorce by way of mutual consent when continuing consent was not available which is sine qua non for passing a decree of divorce under Section 13-B--Is liable to be set aside.; Prem Lata v. Ashok Kumar, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 782
S.13-B--Divorce by mutual consent--Requirements are-;
(i) They have been living separately for a period of one year.;
(ii) They have not bee able to live together and ;
(iii) They have mutually agreed that marriage should be dissolved; Prem Lata v. Ashok Kumar, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 782

GOVERNMENT RESIDENCES (CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION POOL) ALLOTMENT RULES, 1972

Allotment of Govt. Accommodation--Petitioner became govt. servant during period of two months for which retiring govt. servant in entitled to retain possession--His stay with retiring Govt. servant was shown to have been for more than six months--Petitioner is entitled to such allotment and occupation and question of penalty does not arise.; Narain Saran Dass v. Chandigarh (Union Territory) Administration & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 751
Allotment of Govt. Accommodation--Two qualifications to be fulfilled are--;
(i) That he a Government servant eligible for general pool accommodation.;
(ii) That he has been sharing the accommodation with the retiring officer for at least six months before the date of retirement.; Narain Saran Dass v. Chandigarh (Union Territory) Administration & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 751

EVIDENCE ACT, 1872

Witness--Once testimony of witnesses aspire confidence documents not necessary for corroboration.; Varinder Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 776
S.32--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.304, Part- II--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 304 Part II--Murder--Dying declaration--Deceased specifically stated that accused pushed him into chemical tank--No enmity to falsely implicate accused--Statement free from suspicion, tutoring or prompting and being truthful worthy of full evidence--Learned trial Court rightly relied on dying declaration to record finding that accused caused death of deceased--However, in view of fact that accused in agitated state merely pushed deceased resulting into fall in chemical tank, it cannot be said that he had intention to kill--Held; that case is covered under exception 4 of Section 300 IPC--Accused is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder--Conviction of accused under Section 302 set aside--He is convicted under Section 304, Part II--In view of his having undergone more than 4 years of imprisonment sentence modified to period already undergone.; Rajneesh Pandey v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) (DB) 757

ESSENTIAL COMMODITIES ACT, 1955

S.7--Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Regulation of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1993, R.7(d)--Acquittal--Accused prosecuted for charging excess price for LPG--Complainant no where explained that Rs.330 was charged in excess for price of cylinder--Neither any official of oil company nor any officer of Food and Supplies Department examined to explain as to what was actual price of gas cylinder--In absence of such evidence it would be difficult to say that Rs.330 were charged as excess price of gas cylinders particularly when it not case of prosecution that only gas cylinder was sold--Accused had sold connection which consists of gas cylinder, regulator, refilling charges etc.--No definite evidence has come to prove that Rs.330/- were paid extra by complainant--Accused acquitted.; Kala Devi v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 794

EAST PUNJAB URBAN RENT RESTRICTION ACT, 1949

S.13--Ejectment--Non-payment of Rent--Execution of rent note proved--Non production of account books by landlord have no significance--Ejectment ordered.; Jain Charitable (free) Eye Hospital, Jind v. Kharati Lal, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 734
S.13--Ejectment--Non-payment of Rent--Rate of Rent--Entry in house tax assessment record--No presumption of correctness can be attached--Inspector who conducted survey for purpose of assessment of house tax not examined at trial--Entry in house tax assessment record cannot relied for rate of rent.; Jain Charitable (free) Eye Hospital, Jind v. Kharati Lal, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 734
S.13--Ejectment--Non-payment of Rent--Rent note--Terms and conditions of rent agreements duly documented in form of rent notes--Execution of rent note proved by testimony on oath by son of deceased deed writer and also an attesting witness beside statement made by handwriting and fingerprint expert--Tenants failed to prove plea that their signatures were obtained on blank stamp paper--Ejectment ordered.; Jain Charitable (free) Eye Hospital, Jind v. Kharati Lal, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 734

EAST PUNJAB HOLDINGS (CONSOLIDATION PREVENTION OF FRAGMENTATION) RULES, 1949

R.18--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, S.42 and 44--Natural justice--Jurisdiction of Civil Court--Whenever principles of natural justice are violated, order becomes nullity and civil Court gets jurisdiction even otherwise there is bar to jurisdiction of Civil Court--Plaintiffs nos. 1 to 9 not made party to application filed by defendant under Section 42--No notice of said application or opportunity of hearing was given to plaintiffs 1 to 9--Thus, mandatory provision of provision to Section 42 violated--Therefore, Civil Court has jurisdiction notwithstanding bar of jurisdiction created under Section 44.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.18--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, S.42 and 44--Re-opening of partition--Delay of 25 years for filing application under Section 42--On ground that he was posted out of his village since 1953 to 1979--This vague, general and specious ground by defendant no.1 for condonation of delay of 25 years cannot be accepted--In addition plaintiff no.10 and defendant no.2 purchased land from original allottee were bonofide purchaser for consideration--They cannot be made to suffer merely because defendant no.1 opted to move application under Section 42 of Act more than quarter century after repartition scheme had been finalised on 1.11.1953--Order of Director, Consolidation Holding unsustainable. ; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949, S.18--Re-opening of partition--Delay of 25 years for filing application under Section 42--On ground that he was posted out of his village since 1953 to 1979--This vague, general and specious ground by defendant no.1 for condonation of delay of 25 years cannot be accepted--In addition plaintiff no.10 and defendant no.2 purchased land from original allottee were bonofide purchaser for consideration--They cannot be made to suffer merely because defendant no.1 opted to move application under Section 42 of Act more than quarter century after repartition scheme had been finalised on 1.11.1953--Order of Director, Consolidation Holding unsustainable. ; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Rules, 1949 Rule 18--Natural justice--Jurisdiction of Civil Court--Whenever principles of natural justice are violated, order becomes nullity and civil Court gets jurisdiction even otherwise there is bar to jurisdiction of Civil Court--Plaintiffs nos. 1 to 9 not made party to application filed by defendant under Section 42--No notice of said application or opportunity of hearing was given to plaintiffs 1 to 9--Thus, mandatory provision of provision to Section 42 violated--Therefore, Civil Court has jurisdiction notwithstanding bar of jurisdiction created under Section 44.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742
S.42 and 44--Plaintiffs claimed to be bonafide purchasers of suit land from original allottees or their vendees--Question of title arose--Director, Consolidation of Holding has no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon said question of title--Order passed by Director, Consolidation holdings is unsustainable.; Joginder Nath alias Joginder Pal v. Sat Pal & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 742

DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961

S.6(3)--Indian Penal Code, 1860--S. 304-B--Dowry Death--Custody of dowry article after death of woman--Whether husband even if he is acquitted of charge under section 304-B IPC could retain dowry articles on death of her wife--Held No.; Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 799
S.6(3)--Indian Penal Code, 1860--S. 304-B--Dowry Death--Custody of dowry article after death of a woman--Deceased died within 7 years of marriage--She died an unnatural death other than normal circumstances--Her husband acquitted of charge under Section 304-B IPC giving benefit of doubt--Dowry article which is in custody of appellant, father of deceased shall remain in his custody--Application of husband for cancellation of superdari in favour of appellant dismissed.; Balbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 799

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973

S.313--Examination of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.--Object--Is to enable accused personally to explain any circumstances appearing in evidence against him--A circumstance about which accused had not been asked to explain cannot be used against him.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790
S.313--Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, S.15--Contraband--Acquittal--Recovery of 5 bags of poppy husk each containing 30 kgs.--Affidavits of carrier of sample parcels as well as MHC with whom case property was deposited was not put to accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C.--Cannot be looked into evidence against him--Link evidence is missing--Appellant acquitted.; Niku v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 790
S.378(4)--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138--Appeal against acquittal--Leave to file--Dishonour of Cheque--Security Cheque--There was no legal liability at time of issuance of cheque by accused in favour of complainant--Cheque given as security to get sale deed executed--Accused is not liable under provisions of Section 138 of N.I. Act--Trial Court given sound reasons while acquitting accused--No ground made out to grant leave to file an appeal against acquittal.; Satinder Kumar v. Gurvinder Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 724
S.439--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 201, 120-B & 34--Bail--Murder--First version by way of DDR does not implicate anybody--FIR lodged after delay of 10 days--Extra judicial confession made by petitioner, wife of deceased after 7 months of lodging FIR--Two of accused left out by prosecution from array of accused--As per medico legal report deceased used to consumption of heavy quantity of alcohol--No definite opinion in regard to any homicidal act--None of witnesses recorded--Bail granted.; Sanjay & Gandhi v. State of Haryana, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 760
S.439--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 307, 323, 148, 149, 120-B--Arms Act,1959 S.25 & 27--Bail--Murder--Attempt to murder--Petitioners not attributed any role in FIR--However in statement before trial Court they have alleged to have armed with weapon--But no injury caused by them--Keeping in view role attributed to petitioners in occurrence and fact that they have been in custody for last one year and two months and also that trial in the case is likely to take time it would be just expedient to grant concession of bail.; Harphool Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 736
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.323/506--Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, S.3(1)(x) (xi)--Quashing of complaint--Allegations of commission of offence under S.C. and S.T. are not made out--Complaint filed not for reason that petitioner has committed an offence rather with some ulterior motive--There was some dispute in regard to path--Both sides were trying to take possession of that path--In malafide exercise Criminal complaint filed so as to pressurize petitioner in matter of possession of the path--This is when on repeated complaints and three enquiries investigation agency concluded that no offence under S.C. and S.T. Act had been committed--Factum of conclusion drawn by police authorities or enquires intentionally not disclosed in complaint--In such circumstance, continuance of these proceedings shall result in abuse of process of Court--Complaint quashed.; Dilbagh Singh & Ors. v. Sukhjinder Kaur, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 729
S.482--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.420, 467, 468, 471 & 120-B--Quashing--Cheating--Allegation that accused no. 1 to 6 in collusion with each other got sale deed executed and registered in favour of accused no.2 in regard to land that had already gifted to complainant and her son by her father-in-law--Accused no.2 witnessed sale deeds although he was in full knowledge of gift deeds since time of their execution and registration--Considering nature of allegations, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. evidence cannot be taken by way of affidavit to disprove facts alleged in complaint--Petitioner would have right to lead evidence in defence to negate allegations--In view of disputed facts no grounds for quashing impugned complaint and summoning order made out.; Paramjit Singh v. State Of Punjab & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 746

COURT FEES ACT, 1870

Ad-valorem Court Fee--Definite case of plaintiff that amount of Rs. 19,41,261.1 is due from defendant although some more amount may also be due--Plaintiff has camouflaged its claim by making prayer for settlement of account only but in fact plaintiff is seeking recovery of amount found due--Plaintiff has to pay ad-volorem Court fee on aforesaid amount.; M/s Maha Singh Ram Mehar Rice & General Mills v. M/s Devi Dyal Amar Nath, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 762
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.149--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.7, R.11(C)--Deficit Court Fee--Plaintiff paid deficit court fee within time granted in first instance by Trial Court as required by Order 7, Rule 11(c)--Plaint could not be rejected on ground of deficit Court fee.; Bikkar Singh v. Jeet Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 748

CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908

O.5, R.20--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.9, R.7--Exparte Proceedings--Setting aside of--Substituted Service--Where the Court resorts to effect service upon defendant by way of publication, it has to specify the newspaper which shall be a daily newspaper circulating in the locality in which the said defendant is last known to have actually and voluntarily resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain--Petitioners resides at Amritsar--Publication carried out in newspaper by name ‘Chardi Kalan, Bhiwani’--Newspaper by aforesaid name in all probability a local newspaper would not be having any circulation in area outside District Bhiwani--Exparte proceeding set aside--Petitioners permitted to join proceedings in suit subject to condition that they appear and file written statement on same very day.; M/S S.N.Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. Shri Sanjeev Kumar & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 726
O.7, R.11(C)--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, S.149--Court Fees Act, 1870--Deficit Court Fee--Plaintiff paid deficit court fee within time granted in first instance by Trial Court as required by Order 7, Rule 11(c)--Plaint could not be rejected on ground of deficit Court fee.; Bikkar Singh v. Jeet Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 748
O.9, R.7--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.5, R.20--Exparte Proceedings--Setting aside of--Substituted Service--Where the Court resorts to effect service upon defendant by way of publication, it has to specify the newspaper which shall be a daily newspaper circulating in the locality in which the said defendant is last known to have actually and voluntarily resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain--Petitioners resides at Amritsar--Publication carried out in newspaper by name ‘Chardi Kalan, Bhiwani’--Newspaper by aforesaid name in all probability a local newspaper would not be having any circulation in area outside District Bhiwani--Exparte proceeding set aside--Petitioners permitted to join proceedings in suit subject to condition that they appear and file written statement on same very day.; M/S S.N.Hotels & Resorts (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. Shri Sanjeev Kumar & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 726
O.39, R.1 & 2--Temporary Injunction--Possession--There is sufficient material in form of revenue entries consistently for 20 years before filing of suit depicting possession of plaintiff and performa defendant no.2 over suit land--Mere filing of application for correction of Khasra girdawari would not depict that defendant/petitioner is prima facie in possession of suit land--Moreover, application for correction of khasra girdawari was moved 17 years after entries made in Jamabandi--Application for temporary injunction rightly allowed.; Jag Ram v. Manphool & Anr., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 721
O.41, R.27--Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, S.173--Accident--Compensation--Liability of Insurance Company--Additional Evidence--Valid driving licence--Driving Licence allowed to taken on record by way of additional evidence--Insurance Company got licence verified from Licencing Authority--Driver of offending vehicle had valid driving licence at time of accident--Impugned part of award granting recovery rights to insurance company set aside.; Dinesh Kumar & Anr. v. Smt. Roshni Devi & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 750
S.100(3), O.41, Rule 2 & 3--Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Order, Volume I, Chapter I, Part B--Memorandum of Appeal--Rejection of--Amendment after admission of appeal--Memo of appeal not containing substantial question of law as required under Section 100(3) of C.P.C.--Rule 10 of Punjab and Haryana High Court Rules and Orders provides that application under Rule 2, Order 41 CPC, ought to have been moved prior to date fixed for hearing appeal--No such application filed under Order 41, Rule 2 despite the fact that appeal is pending since 1982 and Supreme Court judgment in Kulwant Kaur’s case came in 2001--Adjournment of appeal enabling appellant to move amendment application declined--Memo of appeal rejected under Rule 3 Order 41 C.P.C.; Rajinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors., ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 722
S.149--Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.7, R.11(C)--Court Fees Act, 1870--Deficit Court Fee--Plaintiff paid deficit court fee within time granted in first instance by Trial Court as required by Order 7, Rule 11(c)--Plaint could not be rejected on ground of deficit Court fee.; Bikkar Singh v. Jeet Singh, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 748

ARMS ACT,1959

S.25 & 27--Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302, 307, 323, 148, 149, 120-B--Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.439--Bail--Murder--Attempt to murder--Petitioners not attributed any role in FIR--However in statement before trial Court they have alleged to have armed with weapon--But no injury caused by them--Keeping in view role attributed to petitioners in occurrence and fact that they have been in custody for last one year and two months and also that trial in the case is likely to take time it would be just expedient to grant concession of bail.; Harphool Singh v. State of Punjab, ; 2010(1) Law Herald (P&H) 736