Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1991 Page 1 of about 21 results (0.028 seconds)

Jan 11 1991 (HC)

State of Punjab Vs. M/S. Chahal Engg. and Co.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-11-1991

Reported in : AIR1991P& H258

..... common schedule of rates volume ii and over and above this allowed premium at 575%. he ignored the limits and restrictions provided in the general conditions of the contract. the contractor nowhere pleaded or proved that after the executive engineer made alterations in the original drawings and specifications he invoked the stipulations contained in cl. 66 of ..... taxes, tolls, octroi, royalties, patent rights etc. the tenderer was to furnish detailed designs and working designs. clauses 11 and 66 of the general conditions of the contract say that the executive engineer can order modifications in original specifications, drawings and designs. if the contractor considers any work demanded of him to be outside the requirements of ..... indian arbitration act, 1940 or any statutory modification thereof. the arbitrator shall determine the amount of costs of arbitration to be awarded to either parties. performance under the contract shall continue during the arbitration proceedings and payments due to the contractor shall not be withheld unless they are the subject matter of the arbitration proceedings. all award ..... general instructions :the tender along with n.i.t. and post-tender correspondence up to date of acceptance together with the letter of acceptance thereof shall constitute a binding contract between the successful tenderer and the department and shall form the foundation for the rights and obligation of both the parties. (extract from information and instructions for tenderers). .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1991 (HC)

Daryao Singh and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-19-1991

Reported in : AIR1992P& H169; (1992)101PLR457

..... . since the outlet has been provided in violation of these statutory provisions, the same is rendered invalid. the submission is devoid of merit. a rice shoot is purely a temporary contract shoot for a single crop only. rice shoots are sanctioned for delivering extra water supply over and above the normal water allowance. no new area is permanently allotted for irrigation ..... under the rice shoot policy:--outlet provided underthe act.temporary seasonaloutlet provided under rice shoot policy.(a) the outlet is of apermanent nature.(a) the rice shoot ispurely a temporary contract shoot for a single-crop only.(b) superintending canalofficer cannot sanction any outlet of discharge less than 0.75 cusecs, thatis, for an area less than 312 acres.(b) rice ..... once deposited is not to be refunded as perpara 3, rule (viii) of rice shoot policy.(f) no written agreementfor contract is normally required before installation of an outlet.(f) sanction of a riceshoot is essentially subject to the execution of contract agreement betweenthegovernment and consumer.(g) an outlet is usuallysanctioned at a normal waier allowance of 2.4 cusecs per 1000 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1991 (HC)

State of Haryana Vs. Lal Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-01-1991

Reported in : 1992CriLJ3061

a.s. nehra, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3-6-1986 passed by the sessions judge, karnal, by which the respondent was acquitted of the charge under section 16(1)(a)(i) read with section 7 of the prevention of food adulteration act, 1954 (hereinafter called the act).2. on 15-5-1983 at about 11-30 a.m. government food inspector r. d. goel (pw-1) accompanied by dr. k. l. sachdeva (pw-3) visited the shop of the respondent and found him in possession of cow milk weighing about 7 kgs. the government food inspector disclosed his identity, served notice exhibit pa on the respondent and then purchased for analysis 660 mls. of boiled milk on payment of rs. 2/-, vide receipt exhibit pb. the sample, as purchased, was divided into three equal parts and put into three dry and clean bottles. formalin was added to all the three bottles which were duly stoppered, labelled and wrapped in a strong thick paper and were secured by means of strong twine and sealed. the sample was taken in the presence of dr. k. l. sachdeva pw-3 and one mool chand. sample memo exhibit pc was prepared. it was signed, amongst others, by the respondent also. one sealed bottle was sent to the public analyst, haryana, for analysis and the remaining two bottles were kept in the office of the local health authority. according to the report exhibit pd of the public analyst, the sample milk was found to be adulterated. it was deficient in milk-solids-not-fat to the extent of 23.5 per cent of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 1991 (HC)

Shri Suresh Oberoi and anr. Vs. Dev Singh Assur and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-01-1991

Reported in : (1991)99PLR529

orders.s. grewal, j.1. this petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973, relates to quashment of complaint dated 12-6-1989, under sections 294, 295a/500 read with section 34 i.p.c. (annexure p-1) and summoning order dated 19-12-1989, passed by the chief judicial magistrate, sangrur (annexure p-2).2. in brief, facts relevant for the disposal of this petition as emerge from the complaint, are that shri arvind bhatt, accused no. 2 is the director of film sant valmiki, whereas suresh oberoi, accused no. 1, has performed the main role of sant valmiki in the said film. suresh oberoi accused gave an interview to film city magazine wherein he stated, that valmiki is known in the world for writing ramayana, but, before ramayana was written by him he was a daku he committed, robberies with the passers by and when he came to know about the crimes he had committed, he changed himself completely. it was further pleaded that suresh oberoi by using defamatory language towards sant valmiki. deliberately and maliciously with intent to outrage religious feelings of valmikis of the country, caused insult to the religious feelings of the said community, it was next pleaded that valmiki community of the country worship sant valmiki like a bhagwan, and the accused by filming sant valmiki and giving interview to film city magazine and publishing objectionable obscene photographs in film reporter issue no. 7 of may, 1989 in which sant valmiki (suresh oberoi) is touching a lady .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 28 1991 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surinder Kumar Parmod Kumar and Others.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-28-1991

Reported in : (1992)100CTR(P& H)279; [1992]193ITR71(P& H); [1992]60TAXMAN284(Punj& Har)

ashok bhan j. - the income-tax appellate tribunal, amritsar, has referred to this court the following four questions of law its opinion :'1. whether, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is correct in holding that the applications made after the expiry of the due dates are valid in law and that the incometac officer is bound to consider them ?2. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is correct in law in holding that if no rejection is communicated to the assessee, he is justified in presuming that the extension applications having been made were duly granted by the income-tax officer ?3. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is correct in law of holding that the asses see is not required to incorporate all the reasonable causes in the explanation submitted by him to the income-tax officer and that whether the income-tax appellate tribunal is justified in considering a cause not so incorporated in the explanation ?4. whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income-tax appellate tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessee was not in default right from june 10, 1971, when the return was due to the date the return filed ?'the facts briefly stated are as under :for the assessment year 1971-72, the department, on may 4, 1971, issued notice under section 139(2) of the income-tax act ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 1991 (HC)

Ranjit Kaur Vs. Pavittar Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-29-1991

Reported in : 1992CriLJ262

..... being against public policy would also be against the clear intendment of this provision. though the phrase 'public policy' or 'opposed to public policy' has neither been defined in the contract act nor anywhere else, yet by now in the light of various authoritative pronouncements of different courts, including the final one, (central inland water transport corporation ltd. v. tarun kanti ..... the former case, the legislature penalises it or prohibits it. in the later case, it merely refuses to give effect to it. that is what exactly section 23 of the contract act provides for. we are thus clearly of the opinion that the agreement of the type referred to in the question posed may not per se be illegal but it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 1991 (HC)

State of Punjab, Etc. Vs. His Highness the Maharaja of the Erstwhile S ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-12-1991

Reported in : (1994)106PLR16

g.r. majithia, j.1. the defendants have come up in appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial judge dated march 30, 1989, whereby the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of rs. 25,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the institution of the suit till realization was decreed.2. the facts:-the grandfather of the plaintiff-respondent was the sovereign ruler of the erstwhile state of kapurthala; that he owned personal property in united provinces popularly known as oudh estate of the maharaja of kapurthala; that income of the oudh estate was amalgamated with the revenue of the erstwhile kapurthala state and it was deposited in the kapurthala state treasury; that a sum of rs. 50,00,000/- out of the saving of the income of oudh estate was lying in the kapurthala state treast as state reserve fund in the year 1948, which was the personal property of the grandfather of the plaintiff-respondent; that late his highness maharaja jagatjit singh grandfather of the plaintiff-respondent, being the sovereign ruler, had unimpeachable right to deal with the state property including the money lying in the kapurthala state treasury; that on may 15, 1948, patiala and east punjab states union (hereinafter to be referred to as the pepsu) came into existence; that pepsu was comprised of the states of patiala, kapurthala, faridkot. jind, malerkotla, nabha, kalsia and nalagarh and covenant leading to the formation of pepsu was signed by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1991 (HC)

Chander Parkash Vs. Ved Parkash and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-22-1991

Reported in : (1991)99PLR606

k.p. bhandari, j.1. petitioner's father owned house no. 50 sector 10-a, chandigarh, measuring 500 sq yards which property was inherited by the sons and daughters of the deceased. the respondents filed a suit for partition of the property and is that suit a preliminary decree dated 30-9-1988 was passed by the additional senior sub judge, chandigarh. on appeal against the aforesaid preliminary judgment and decree, passed by the trial court, district judge, modified the findings of the trial court on issues no. 1, 2, 3 and 4 on 1-9-1984.2. the proceedings for passing of the final decree were taken up by the subordinate judge. the subordinate judge appointed shri r. s. walia, advocate, as local commissioner to suggest the mode of partition. the local commissioner submitted his report dated 7-2-1989. against the report submitted by the local commissioner, petitioner chander parkash submitted objections. the subordinate judge vide his order dated 31-7-1989 rejected the objections. the subordinate judge recorded a finding that according to the report of the local commissioner, the property in dispute cannot be partitioned by metes and bounds. the court also came to the conclusion that according to the rules framed by the union territory, chandigarh administration, it is not permissible to partition the property by metes and bounds. the petitioner filed review petition before the subordinate judge for review of the order dated 31-7-1989 which was dismissed by order dated 31-7-1989.3. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1991 (HC)

Balram Singh Vs. Sukhwant Kaur and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-09-1991

Reported in : 1992CriLJ792

a.p. chowdhri, j.1. the short significant question for our decision is -- whether the offence of criminal breach of trust punishable under section 406 of the indian penal code is a continuing offence.2. while hearing cri. misc. no. 7923-m of 1989 j.s. sekhon, j. noticed a conflict of views on the point. in cri. misc. no. 2985-m of 1989 (renu and ors. v. the state of haryana) decided by j.s. sekhon, j. on february 12, 1990, and in hakam singh v. the state of punjab, 1989 (2) recent cr 442, decided by one of us (a.p. chowdhri, j.), it was held that the offence under section 406 was a continuing offence. in gurvel singh v. rajinder singh, 1990 marriage law journal 131, s.d. bajaj, j., on the other hand, held that section 406 did not amount to a continuing offence.3. by order dated may 3, 1990, the learned judge referred the aforesaid question for decision by a larger bench. this is how the case has been heard by us.4. chapter xxxvi (sections 467 to 473) relating to limitation for taking cognizance of certain offences was added in the code of criminal procedure, 1973, for the first time. section 467 relates to definitions. section 468 prescribes the period of limitation for various offences, a smaller period of limitation having been prescribed for offences punishable with smaller imprisonment and larger period of limitation being prescribed for offences punishable with greater imprisonment. the period of limitation for offences punishable up to three years, is three years. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1991 (HC)

Mukand Lal and ors. Vs. Ballu Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-22-1991

Reported in : (1991)99PLR524

k.p. bhandari, j.1. this is defendants second appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the additional district judge, ferozepore.2. the facts of this case are not in dispute. briefly, the defendants alongwith other co-owners mortgaged land measuring 69 kanals 14 marias for a sum of rs. 1000/-. earlier mortgage is dated 26-1 1 -1 954 for a sum of rs. l000/-. this is recorded in the jamabandi. assistant collector redeemed the land on 21-21985. the defendants had one-half share in the land. the other co-owners did not join hand with the defendants for moving application for redemption. consequently, the defendants appellants filed an application under section 3 of the redemption of mortgages act, 1913 (act no. 2 of 1913) (hereinafter referred to as the act) before the assistant collector for redemption of land on payment of ks 502/-being his half share of the mortgaged amount. notice of the said application was issued to tae plaintiffs-respondents by the assistant collector. the plaintiffs filed reply to the application wherein they raised an objection that the applicant could not seek redemption on payment of one half share of the mortgaged amount, in view of the provisions of section 60 of the transfer of property act. when the case came up for hearing before the assistant collector, the learned counsel for the plaintiffs did not urge this objection the assistant collector vide order dated 21-2-1985 ordered redemption of one half share of land of the defendant on .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //