Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1995 Page 1 of about 193 results (0.053 seconds)

Aug 02 1995 (HC)

Pawan Kumar Vs. Chanchal Kumari

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-02-1995

Reported in : (1996)113PLR199

..... into three pages. the appellant has proved due execution of this deed by examining the scribe krishan lal, pw-1, attesting witness balak ram pw-5 as well as the mediators sardari lal pw-2 and sat pal pw-3 besides examining himself as pw-6. the respondent could not rebut this evidence. she has only examined herself and has denied .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 1995 (HC)

Rama Kanta Vs. Mohinder Laxmidas Bhandula

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-07-1995

Reported in : AIR1996P& H98

..... . the respondent had no objection in marrying a divorcee as is evident from the advertisement given for his marriage in the tribune by mukand kulkarni (pw 2) who was a mediator for the settlement of this marriage becuase he is an employee of chand threatre owned by appellant's brothers and his brother is respondent's neighbour at akola. even in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 1995 (HC)

Bhajan Singh and ors. Vs. Jaswant Kaur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-15-1995

Reported in : (1996)113PLR177

n.k. kapoor, j.1. the judgment shall dispose regular second appeals no. 2887 of 1995 and 277 of 1986.2. the dispute relates to of chanan singh son of kishan singh between his sister smt. santo on one hand and karnail singh, didar singh, surjit singh and others, grand-sons of jaimal singh - real brother of chanan singh on the other hand. smt. santo claimed the property being the nearest relation of chanan singh deceased whereas karnail singh and others laid claim on the basis of will alleged to have been executed by chanan singh in their favour on 7.3.1969. both set of claimants filed separate suits. smt. santo filed a suit for possession and mesne profits whereas other claimants filed suit for declaration and possession. both the suits were consolidated by the trial court.3. on the pleadings of the parties issues were framed and opportunity was granted to the respective contending parties to adduce evidence in support of their respective contentions. issues were framed with regard to the validity of the will, relationship of the defendants with the deceased, relationship of smt. santo i.e. whether she is the real sister of chanan singh and jaimal singh, with, regard to the suit being barred by limitation, it being bad for non-joinder of necessary parties and other such related issues. on two material issues i.e. relating to relationship of smt. santo with chanan singh and as to validity of the will set up by the other contending party the court after scrutinizing the evidence .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1995 (HC)

inder Singh (Deceased) and ors. Vs. Mukand Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-09-1995

Reported in : (1996)112PLR360

n.k. kapoor, j.1. this order shall dispose of regular second appeal 1580 and 1581 of 1981.2. this is defendant's regular second appeal. brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are as under :-mehma singh son of hira singh was the original owner of the land. he mortgaged the suit land with possession with jot ram and milkhi ram. shiv ram purchased the mortgaged rights in this land from jot ram and milkhi ram and so became mortgagee of the land. his rights were inherited by kishan chand and om parkash. on mehma singh's death his rights in the land were inherited by mukhtiar singh (hereinafter called the mortgagor). mukhtiar singh sold 111 bighas of land out of the suit land to mukand singh, gurcharan singh, jangir kaur and anr. (vendees from the mortgagor). one harnam singh, predecessor in interest of gurdial singh, mewa singh, inder singh, moden singh and smt. bachni stated to have entered into forcible possession of the land in dispute while it was in possession of the mortgagees and after his death his heirs have continued to remain in occupation of the same. mutation in respect of land sold to the vendees was entered and sanctioned in their favour in the year 1975. similarly, mutation with regard to the redemption of land was sanctioned in favour of the mortgagor on 28.4.1975. it is thereafter, that the mortgagor and vendees filed suit against the trespassers (heirs of harnam singh) and mortgagees for possession of land. sarvshri inder singh, gurdial singh .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 1995 (HC)

Smt. Chano (Died) and ors. Vs. Partap (Deceased) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-20-1995

Reported in : (1996)113PLR481

n.k. kapoor, j.1. this is defendant's regular second appeal.2. plaintiffs filed a suit for declaration that the mortgage in dispute stands foreclosed and that the plaintiffs have become owners of the suit land and that the defendants be restrained from interfering with their possession over the suit land.3. briefly put, it is the case of the plaintiffs that originally one sis ram 0s/o badlu mortgaged with possession his agricultural land fully described in para no. 1 of the plaint to one bhola mutation of which was attested on 11.11.1925. sub-sequently, chandgi s/o bhola sold his mortgage rights to baldeva and banwari and mutation was sanctioned on 12.7.1984. after the consolidation of holdings in the village, area measuring 22 kanals 2 marias was allotted in lieu of the land originally mortgaged by sis ram. since the mortgagors have lost their right of redemption, the mortgage stands foreclosed as the same had not been redeemed within a period of thirty years.4. defendant admitted the factum of mortgage and subsequent sale of mortgage rights by chandgi s/o bhola to baldeva and banwari. the defendant also admitted that the suit land was allotted after the consolidation of holdings in the village. however, the assertion of the plaintiffs that the mortgagors have lost all the rights of redemption and that the mortgage stands foreclosed by operation of law was denied. by way of additional plea, it was stated that the defendant paid a sum of rs. 600/- to smt. dharkan and partap .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1995 (HC)

Lohna Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-09-1995

Reported in : (1995)111PLR504

v.k. jhanji, j. 1. in this petition, challenge is to the mutation attested in favour of the municipal committee and entries made in the jamabandi pursuant to sanctioning of the mutation.2. it has been averred that village bhapura hadbast no. 70 is situated close to the vicinity of samalkha town, now in panipat town. the state of haryana vide notification dated 20.8.1981 published in official gazette on 1.9.1981 issued under section 2-a(2) read with section 3 of the haryana municipal act, included a part of village land, bhapura in the local area of municipal limits of village samalkha, but the land which is shamlat of the village was not included and till date has remained outside the limits of municipal committee. it has further been averred that though the land as mentioned in para 3 of the writ petition was not included in the municipal limits but the revenue authorities wrongly and illegally got the mutation sanctioned of this land in favour of the municipal committee and later, entries have come to be incorporated in the jamabandi for the year 1991-92. petitioners have alleged that mutation and the entries in the jamabandi are illegal, wrong and without jurisdiction and on the basis of which the possession of the petitioners cannot be interfered with.3. in response to notice of writ petition, municipal committee (respondent no. 2) in its written statement has not only questioned the locus-standi of the petitioners to file the writ petition but has also stated that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 1995 (HC)

Kaila Devi and anr. Vs. Rajbir Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-20-1995

Reported in : (1996)112PLR790

n.k. kapoor, j.1. this is defendant's regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the additional district judge affirming in appeal the judgment and decree of the trial court.2. briefly put, dr. tungal ram was owner of the land subject matter of the suit. on his death, his estate devolved upon his four sons, namely, kulwant singh, balwant singh, kuldeep singh and dr. karan singh, in equal shares. plaintiff rajbir and others filed a suit for joint possession of 5/16th share of land on the allegation that balwant singh alias bhagwant singh who has been ailing on account of tuberculosis, during his life time executed a will in favour of his mother smt. nathian devi and so by virtue of this will she became owner of the share of balwant singh, kulwant singh, other son of smt. nathian devi, died before coming into force of hindu succession act, 1956 and on his death smt. nathian inherited 1/16th share and this way nathian became owner of 5/16th share in the joint holding. smt. nathian executed a will dated 20.7.1968 in favour of the plaintiffs. it so happened that qua the share of balwant singh, the revenue authorities sanctioned mutation in favour of smt. kaila devi, his widow, ignoring the will dated 14.1.1945 executed by balwant singh in favour of his mother srot. nathian devi. it is with a view to get rid of the mutation that plaintiffs filed the present suit and claimed themselves to have succeeded on the basis of will executed in favour of smt. nathiana and smt. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1995 (HC)

Tundal (Deceased) Vs. Munshi and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-15-1995

Reported in : (1995)111PLR14

n.k. kapoor, j. 1. this judgment shall dispose of regular second appeal nos. 724, 725, of 1985 and 1740 of 1990 and 307 of 1991 as common questions of law and fact are involved in these appeals.2. facts are being taken from regular second appeal no. 724 of 1985. this is defendants regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the additional district judge whereby the appeal filed by them against the judgment and decree of the trial court was dismissed.3. briefly put, plaintiffs filed a suit for possession by way of redemption on payment of rs. 825/- as mortgage amount against defendant no. 1 on the ground that smt. mohori widow of dan sahai was owner in possession of agricultural land as detailed in para 1 of the plaint. it was further stated in the plaint that during the consolidation proceedings, the land measuring 45 kanals 8 marlas described in para no. 2 of the plaint was allotted to her in lieu of old khasra nos. the aforesaid land was mortgaged by her with possession with defendant no. 1 vide registered mortgage deed dated 25.9.1951 for ostensible consideration of rs. 2200/- which amount was reduced to rs. 825/- in view of the civil court decree. mutation was sanctioned on the basis of civil court decree on 2.4.1957. smt. mohori died in or about the year 1967. mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of persons mentioned in pedigree table as given in para no. 5 of the plaint. hukam singh plaintiff no. 6 and dal chand plaintiff no. 7 acquired rights .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 1995 (HC)

Surjan Singh Vs. the Gram Panchayat and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-16-1995

Reported in : (1995)111PLR84

t.h.b. chalapathi, j. 1. this writ petition is filed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders of the collector, patiala, dated february 8, 1980, be confirmed by the joint director, panchayats, punjab, vide her order dated february 23, 1981.2. gram panchayat of village mandhaur, district patiala, filed an application before the collector under section 11 read with section 7 of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the act) for decision of the title of the gram panchayat and for recovery of possession and also for ejectment of surjan singh from the land comprised in khasra no. 51/116, 4//1(0-4), 19(1-10),, 20(6-18), 21(8-0), 22(7-8) measuring 24 kanals. the petitioner contested the said application on the ground that the land was comprised by him in an auction held in the year 1944 by the executive council of nabha state and he purchased it for a sum of rs. 9,250/- and his name was mutated in the revenue records, and, therefore, he became the owner of the land. when he was dispossessed by the gram panchayat, he filed a suit in the court of sub judge first class, bassi, on february 16, 1969, and that suit was decreed on june 18, 1970. in pursuance of the decree, he had been put in possession of the property on september 5, 1972, and he continued to be in possession of the property thereafter and that the land cannot be described as shamlat deh within the definition of section 2(g) of the act. the collector by his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1995 (HC)

Bara Singh and anr. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-10-1995

Reported in : (1995)110PLR377

v.k. jhanji, j.1. in this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india, petitioners are seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 20.9.1991 passed by the additional director panchayat, punjab exercising the powers of commissioner under section 11 of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act) whereby appeal filed by the gram panchayat was accepted and the order of the collector, patiala exercising the powers of district development and panchayat officer (for short the ddpo) dated 26.11.1985 was set aside.2. mutation of the land in dispute was sanctioned in favour of the gram panchayat on 25.7.1964. having felt aggrieved of the order of mutation in favour of the panchayat, petitioners filed a civil suit on 22.11.1974. in the suit, the petitioners claimed themselves to be the owner of the land in dispute. the suit of the plaintiffs was decreed on 31.3.1975 by the sub judge, patiala. no appeal against the judgment and decree dated 31.3.1975 was preferred and thus the matter became final between the parties. in pursuance of the order dated 31.3.1975 mutation no. 2685 was sanctioned in favour of the petitioners. subsequently, the act was amended by act no. 19 of 1976 whereby it was provided that the provisions of this act shall have effect notwithstanding any thing to the contrary contained in any law, or any agreement, instrument, custom or usage, or any decree or order of any court or .....

Tag this Judgment!

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