Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2000 Page 1 of about 103 results (0.024 seconds)

Aug 21 2000 (HC)

Lakhwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-21-2000

Reported in : AIR2002P& H2; 2000CriLJ4751

..... order dated 21-7-1998. 3. in the fir, it is stated that the wife was married to jaswinder singh on 17-2-1995. one baldev singh joshi was the mediator. the parents of the wife had spent an amount beyond their means on the marriage but the in-laws were not satisfied. after marriage they started taunting the complainant for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2000 (HC)

Lal Singh Vs. Gurdial Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-28-2000

Reported in : (2000)126PLR266

m.l. singhal, j.1. gurdial singh plaintiff filed suit for joint possession against lal singh claiming half share of the land measuring 47 kanal 3 marla as recorded in jamabandi for 1984-85 of village bahona, on the allegations that land measuring 47 kanal 3 marla was owned by one dal singh son of bika singh who was father of gurdial singh and lal singh. defendant lal singh contested the suit urging that he is the son of dal singh while gurdial singh was not the son of dal singh. gurdial singh is not recorded as son of dal singh in the revenue record. it was further urged that he and nihal kaur are the only children of dal singh. gurdial singh is not the off spring of dal singh. he is shown as pichhlag of dal singh in the revenue record.2. plaintiffs suit was decreed by the subordinate judge iind class moga. lal singh went in appeal to the district court at faridkot.3. along with the memo of appeal, lal singh put in an application under order 6 rule 17 cpc whereby he prayed for leave of the court to permit him to amend his written statement so that he could plead that dal singh had executed registered will dated 13.5.1975 in his favour and that mutation no. 5725 had been sanctioned in his favour on the strength of that will to the exclusion of gurdial singh on account of love and affection for him and in lieu of the services being rendered by him (lal singh) to testator dal singh. it was alleged in the application for amendment that he had proved this will by examining head .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 18 2000 (HC)

Gurjant Singh and anr. Vs. Commissioner, Ferozepore Division and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-18-2000

Reported in : AIR2000P& H161; (2000)125PLR347

v.k. bali, j.1. in a bunch of 163 petitions whtch came to be disposed of by a common judgment, the learned single judge upheld the vires of section 7 of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 and besides some other, dismissed civil writ petitions nos. 18016, 18018 and 18049 of 1991 on merits as well. petitioners in civil writ petitions referred to above, being not satisfied have filed the present letters patent appeals bearing nos. 868, 884 and 869 of 1992 under clause x of the letters patent act and same as dealt with by the learned single judge need be disposed of by a common order.2. the common question that needs, adjudication in all these appeals is as to whether bachat land i.e. land found surplus after putting the land of the proprietors as contributed by them according to their share for the common purposes, vests with gram panchayat or continues to be owned by the proprietors of the village. connected with the question aforesaid is also the question as to whether land which is shown in the revenue records as bachat land, by making a simple mutation in favour of gram panchayat, there being no basis established for such a change, is it mutation that shall prevail in holding as to with whom the land vests or that such a change has to be completely ignored?3. brief facts of the case reveal that gram panchayat, jandoke, tehsil muktsar, distt. faridkot filed an application for eviction of the petitioners in each case by styling them as trespassers on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2000 (HC)

Makhan Singh and anr. Vs. Achhar Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-23-2000

Reported in : (2000)126PLR65

r.l. anand, j.1. unsuccessful plaintiffs makhan singh and his son joginder singh have filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 8.5.1997 passed by additional district judge, faridkot, who dismissed the appeal of the present appellants by affirming the judgment and decree of the learned trial court dated 5.12.1995 passed by additional senior sub judge, muktsar, who dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs.2. it may be mentioned here at the very outset that along with makhan singh and joginder singh present appellants, nazar singh, surat singh, amrik singh and sadha singh, who were defendants no. 3 to 6 in the trial court, also filed an appeal against the judgment and decree of the trial court and vide judgment dated 8.5.1997 (impugned judgment) both the appeals were dismissed. nazar singh, surat singh, amrik singh and sadha singh have not filed any appeal against the judgment and decree dated 8.5.1997 in the high court, but only makhan singh and his son joginder singh, plaintiffs no. 1 and 2, have come in the appeal, which i have heard with the assistance of the lawyers and also disposing of the same with the record of the trial court.3. facts can be gathered in the following manner:-plaintiffs makhan singh and joginder singh filed a suit against achhar singh. defendant no. 1, his son sucha singh, defendant no. 2, nazar singh surat singh, amrik singh and sadha singh, defendants no. 3 to 6 respectively, and these four defendants (no.3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 2000 (HC)

Surinder Mohan Aggarwal Vs. Krishan Mohan Madhok

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-24-2000

Reported in : AIR2001P& H33

orderm.l. singhal, j.1. surinder mohan aggarwal (petitioner-herein) filed application under section 13-a of the east punjab urban rent restriction act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') against krishan mohan madhok respondent for the ejectment of the latter from, building bearing no. b-xix-154/a situated at rani jhansi road, civil lines, ludhiana which is bounded as under:--east : hem raj agarwal west : street north : rani jhansi road south : avinash kaliashown red in plan ex. a-l attached thereto, on the allegations, that he is owner-landlord of this building. one banarsi dass advocate was a tenant in a portion of the building in question at monthly rent of' rs. 550/-. he had sublet the property to the respondent. petitioner filed application under section 13 of the act against banarsi dass on a few grounds including the ground of non-payment of rent and subletting in the year 1980 and order of ejectment was passed aainst the respondent and banarsi dass by shri ss tiwana, rent controller, ludhiana on 19-5-1982. krishan mohan madhok filed appeal which was dismissed on 7-3-1986 by shri r.l. anand, appellate authority, ludhiana, krishan mohan madhok went in revision to the high court, which was allowed on 19-5-1989 and krishan mohan madhok was not held to be subtenant but direct tenant and banarsi dass was not held to be tenant. surinder mohan aggarwal petitioner has alleged in this ejectment application filed in march 1992 that krishan mohan madhok has been held to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 01 2000 (HC)

Laj Dass Vs. Parkash Muni, Chela Swami Shankra Nand Ji and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-01-2000

Reported in : (2000)125PLR404

m.l. singhal, j.1. parkash muni chela swami shankranand ji filed suit for declaration against harsarup brahamcharje son of laj dass son of bachan dass, laj dass, krishna kumar, surjit kaur and sukhdev dass who are son, daughters and son of bachan dass to the effect that he (plaintiff) being the chela of swami sankranand ji inherited land measuring 68 kanal 19 marla as recorded in jamabandi for the year 1979-80 situated in village latala, tehsil and district ludhiana and a dera built on the said land and that mutation sanctioned in favour of laj dass and others defendants 2 to 5 by assistant collector, first grade, ludhiana vide order dated 6.2.85 was illegal, ineffective so far as his rights are concerned and that he is the exclusive owner of the property on the same terms and conditions is held by swami shankranand ji. he sought permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating any portion of the property in any manner whatever. he also sought possession of the property.2. it was alleged in the plaint that this property was donated by the proprietors of the village about a century ago to the udasin sect. this property was treated as religious dedicated property thereafter. daya ram was holding this property as owner on behalf of the udasin sect. on his death, which took place in 1912, the property devolved upon shri bishan dass as chela and spiritual son of daya ram. bishan dass also held the property on behalf of udasin sect. the character of the property was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 2000 (HC)

Sohan Singh and anr. Vs. Bakhshish Kaur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-31-2000

Reported in : (2000)125PLR555

iqbal singh, j.1. plaintiff gurmail singh alias gholi (since deceased and represented by respondent nos. 1 to 3 in this appeal) filed the present suit for declaration with the consequential relief of injunction in respect of the property in dispute against taro widow of rawal singh (since deceased and represented by the appellants in this appeal) and others. in other to understand the facts of the case, the pedigree table of the parties to the suit is given as under:- daulu ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | ran singh ishar singh inder singh (dalip (died 18/19 kaur widow) years ago) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | |rawal singh gurmail babu (died chanan kaur |(taro widow) alias 18/19 years (dead) gurdas | gholi ago) singh (dead) tej kaur (dead) teja singh-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- || | | | | | |malkiat sohan bilu biro surinder manjit |singh singh (son) (dau- kaur kaur |(son) (son) ghter (daughter) | ----------------------------------------- | | | surjit iqbal manjit singh singh kaur (son) (son) (daughter)2. ishar singh as well as babu died issueless and wifeless about 18/19 years ago. ran singh and rawal singh had pre-deceased ishar singh and babu. thus, estate of babu and ishar singh devolved upon the plaintiff. chanan kaur and tej kaur being the nearest heirs of both these deceased. chanan kaur died about three .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 05 2000 (HC)

Gram Panchayat Vs. Ajmer Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-05-2000

Reported in : AIR2000P& H331

m.l. singhal, j.1. plaintiffs ajmer singh and bhaghel singh instituted suit for permanent injunction against the gram panchayat of village, balad kalan throughits sarpanch and naib tehsildar, bhawanigarh receiver restraining the latter from auctioning the land, as detailed in the heading of the plaint, situated in village balad kalan, by way of lease for the year, 1994-95. it is alleged in the plaint that land in dispute was carved out during consolidation proceedings. it was allotted to ajmer singh and bhaghel singh by the consolidation authorities with a view to making up deficiency in their holding. plaintiffs were taking steps to take its possession. the gram panchayat and the naib tehsildar, bhawanigarh (receiver) threatened to auction the land in suit on lease for the year 1994-95 if the said threat gets materialised, plaintiffs interest and right would be jeopardise.2. the gram panchayat contested the suit of the plaintiffs urging that the plaintiffs had been allowed other full area in lieu of their preconsolidation, land, land in suit is part of shamilat deh. it could not be allotted to the plaintiffs and was not allotted to them. in any case if the alleged allotment is proved, the same is illegal and does not effect the rights of the defendant-gram panchayat.3. plaintiffs' suit was that during consolidation some land was wrongly deducted at the time of allotment of land to the right holders in order to make up deficiency, they filed revision under section 42, of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 2000 (HC)

Bachan Singh and anr. Vs. Bakshish Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-02-2000

Reported in : (2000)126PLR759

m.l. singhal, j.1. for a better understanding of the case, the following pedigree table is given :- jawala | ---------------------------------------------------- | | | mela keli gandu | | kashmir singh rattan singh garib singh (deceased) & kishan singh ------------------------------------- | | | bachan darshan bakshish singh singh singh 2. rattan singh was owner in possession of 1/2 share of land measuring 94 kanals 7 marlas situated in village jalalpura as detailed in the heading of the plaint. rest 1/2 share of land measuring 94 kanals 7 marlas was owned by bakshshish singh and his two brothers darshan singh and bachan singh. bakhshish singh instituted suit for declaration against darshan singh and bachan singh etc. defendants to the effect that he is owner in possession of 1/2 share of land measuring 94 kanals 7 marlas pertaining to rattan singh on account of will dated 29.12.1978 executed by him in his favour to the exclusion of darshan singh and bachan singh etc. defendants. it was alleged in the plaint that rattan singh was bachelor. he was putting up with him (bakshish singh) jointly. he (bakshish singh) was looking after him and serving him. he was joint in mess and cultivation with rattan singh. rattan singh had love and affection being rendered by him to him. he, therefore, constituted him as his sole heir by will dated 29.12.1978 thereby bequeathing his entire property movable and immovable to him. so far as other brothers of bakshish singh i.e. bachan singh and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2000 (HC)

Balwinder Singh and ors. Vs. Amar Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-28-2000

Reported in : I(2001)DMC47

r.l. anand, j. 1. this is a defendants' appeal and has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.10.1987, passed by the court of addl. distt. judge, ludhiana, who accepted the appeal of amar kaur, plaintiff-respondent by setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 30.9.1985 and decreed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for possession of the land measuring 2 bighas comprised in khasra no. 1141 min and also granted a decree for permanent injunction against the defendants-appellants from interfering in the ownership and enjoyment rights of the plaintiff-respondent with respect to the land measuring 24 bighas as fully described in the head note of the plaint. it may be mentioned here that earlier the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial court.2. the brief facts of the case can be noticed in the following manner :3. the case set up by the plaintiff before the trial court was that she has become the owner of the suit land measuring 24 bighas fully described in the head note of the plaint as a result of the compromise decree passed on 31.5.1979 instituted by her against her husband kartar singh and defendant nos. 1 and 2. she remained in possession of the suit land as owner and, thereafter, by getting it cultivated with the help of her son-in-law. in may, 1983, after the plaintiff reaped the wheat crop, defendants took forcible possession of the land measuring 2 bighas comprised in khasra no. 1141 min out of the suit land. they refused .....

Tag this Judgment!


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