Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2004 Page 5 of about 165 results (0.026 seconds)

Feb 16 2004 (HC)

Gram Panchayat of Village Kherri Vs. the State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-16-2004

Reported in : (2004)137PLR585

j.s. khehar, j.1. (16th february, 2004) - civil writ petition no. 2475 of 1982 was taken up for final disposal alongwith cwp no. 2604 of 1982, 5351 of 1982, 5007 of 1984 and 5008 of 1984. all the aforesaid writ petitions were allowed by a learned single judge of this court on 11.12.1996 [reported as (1997-1)115 p.l.r. 550 - editor].2. the private respondents who were adversely affected by the judgment rendered in the instant writ petition on 11.12.1996 filed civil misc. no. 6047 of 1997 for setting aside the order passed by the learned single judge on 11.12.1996, on account of the fact that they had not been duly served. the aforesaid civil misc. no. 6047 of 1997 was allowed by the same learned single judge who had originally decided cwp no. 2475 of 1982 on 11.12.1996, by a detailed order dated 15.1.1998. accordingly, judgment dated 11.12.1996 rendered in the instant writ petition was recalled and cwp no. 2475 of 1982 was restored to its original number for final disposal.3. the controversy in the instant writ petition relates to allotment of evacuee property made in favour of respondent no. 3 by the custodian. it is not a matter of dispute that the allotted evacuee property was shamilat land. in the decision rendered by the apex court in gram panchayat of village jamalpur v. malwinder singh and ors., 1985 p.l.j. 463, it was concluded that shamilat land owned by evacuees, does not vest in the custodian, but vests in the gram panchayat. on the basis of the aforesaid judgment, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2004 (HC)

Joginder Singh Vs. Gram Panchayat Urjani and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-17-2004

Reported in : (2004)138PLR147

m.m. kumar, j.1. this is tenant's appeal filed under section 54 of the land acquisition act, 1894 (for brevity 'the act') challenging the order of additional district judge, ambala dated 31.3.1987 holding that the tenant-appellant is entitled to apportionment to the extent of the third share of compensation in respect of the land acquired vide notification issued under section 4 of the act on 30.7.1979.2. brief facts of the case as discernible from the record as well as from the judgment of the additional district judge are that a notification under section 4 of the act was issued on 30.7.1979 for acquiring 50.89 acres of land for the purposes of development of marshy area in between dadupur and tejewala for fish culture. the land acquisition collector announced his award on 21.3.1980 awarding compensation @ rs. 5760/- per acre for banjar salab and rs. 1440/- per acre for gair mumkin land which included solatium. the acquired land included an area of 26 kanals 4 marias belonging to the ownership of panchayat deh. this area in the jamabandis was recorded in cultivating possession of joginder singh the tenant-appellant who was described as co-sharer. both joginder singh as well as panchayat deh asserted their claim to the compensation amount of rs. 18,864/- excluding solatium.3. joginder singh, tenant-appellant produced in evidence documents exs.a1 to a5 copies of jamabandis commencing from 1.968-69 and ex.a6 to a9 copies of khasra girdawaris for the year 1973-74 onwards. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 03 2004 (HC)

Bhag Mal and ors. Vs. Ram Murti and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-03-2004

Reported in : (2005)139PLR116

m.m. kumar, j.1. this is defendant's appeal filed under section 100 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (for brevity, 'the code') challenging judgment and decree dated 11.10.1984 passed by the additional district judge, sirsa, whereby the appeal of the plaintiff-respondent was accepted and the judgment and decree dated 25.5.1982 passed by the learned sub judge was reversed holding that the order dated 20.4.1978 passed by the defendant-respondent no. 4 i.e. sub divisional officer (civil), sirsa exercising the powers of prescribed/allotment authority under the haryana ceiling on land holdings act, 1972 (for brevity, '1972 act') was null and void. as a conseqi ence thereof, the suit of plaintiff-respondent nos. 1 to 3 (now represented by their lrs) was decreed in their favour and defendant-respondent no. 4 was granted liberty to utilise the suit land afresh after completion of proceedings in accordance with the provisions of section 14 of 1972 act.2. brief facts of the case are that bihari lal was father of plaintiff-respondents, namely, ram murti, manjit and dhanraj. he died on 8.2.1978. he was declared a big land owner and accordingly vide order dated 31.8.1961 (p-5), the collector hisar declared 40.95 ordinary acres of his land as surplus. by another order dated 11.23.1963 (p-4) another area of 23.99 ordinary acres was declared as surplus. the aforementioned declaration was made in pursuance to the provisions of section 2(3) of the punjab security of land tenures act, 1953 ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2004 (HC)

Bakhshish Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-02-2004

Reported in : (2004)137PLR742

ashutosh mohunta, j.1. the challenge in this petition under articles 226/227 of the constitution of india is to the order dated 7.12.1983 passed by the financial commissioner (appeals), punjab, whereby the petitioners have not been held entitled to the allotment of the land declared surplus in the hands of their father chuhar singh (respondent no. 5) and the same has been directed to be allotted to the other private respondents.2. the undisputed facts of the case are that chuhar singh (respondent no. 5), who is the father of the petitioners, was the owner of 467 kanals 4 marlas of land situated in village ghullowal as per jamabandi for the year 1952-53. he gifted away 203 kanals 1 marlas of land to his sons, namely, bakhshish singh, sarwan singh and baldev singh (petitioners herein) during their minority. on the basis of the said oral gift, an entry with regard to that was made in the revenue record by the patwari of the village on 26.12.1952. however, the mutation in this regard was ultimately rejected on 25.2.1954. after consolidation, chuhar singh owned 406 kanals and 2 marlas of land. the petitioners filed a civil suit in the year 1969 for a declaration that they are owners in possession of 203 kanals and 1 maria of land on the basis of the gift deed dated 26.12.1952. the suit was decreed by the sub judge ist class, dasuya and consequently, the said land was entered in the revenue record in the names of the petitioners. when the proceedings for declaration of surplus were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 24 2004 (HC)

Gram Panchayat Chalela and anr. Vs. the Director, Consolidation of Hol ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-24-2004

Reported in : (2004)137PLR357

s.s. nijjar, j.1. the petitioner gram panchayat has filed this writ petition under articles 226/227 of the constitution of india for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 4.9.1985 (annexure p-2) passed by respondent no. 1. vide aforesaid order, director consolidation of holdings, punjab has directed the consolidation officer to partition the share of each share-holder as per 'hasab rasad zar khewat'. the petitioner states that consolidation proceedings in the village chalela started in the year 1956. the scheme was prepared, published and confirmed under section 20 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the consolidation act'), before consolidation, land measuring 4328 bighas 15 biswas in khewat no. 200 (as per jamabandi for the year 1953-54) was shown as shamlat deh. after consolidation, the aforesaid land was given on lease by the petitioner gram panchayat to various persons. at the time of filing of the present petition, possession of some parts of the land has been illegally taken by the right holders as tenant. the land in dispute was mutated in the name of the gram panchayat as shamlat deh vide mutation no. 1283 dated 16.7.1956. further entries in the jamabandi for the year 1981-82 also show the land in dispute in khewat no. 229 khatauni no. 418 to 550 as ownership of nagar panchayat deh in column no.4 of the jamabandi. as noticed earlier, gram panchayat has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 2004 (HC)

Jit Singh and ors. Vs. Joint Development Commissioner and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-19-2004

Reported in : (2004)137PLR438

v.k. bali, j. 1. challenge in the present petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india is to order dated 31.8,1998, annexure p7, passed by the ddpo/collector dismissing the title suit filed by the gram panchayat village mandlan, tehsil bassi pathana, district fatehgrah sahib under section 11 of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1961') as also the appellate order, annexure pii, dated 16.2.2001 passed by learned joint development commissioner, punjab, dismissing the appeal preferred against order dated 31.8.1998 passed by the collector. it requires to be mentioned here that even though suit was filed by the gram panchayat, insofar as the appeal is concerned, it was filed by the petitioners arraying the gram panchayat as party respondent.2. the bare minimum facts of the case that need a necessary mention, as projected in the writ petition, reveal that there was a land described in the revenue records as sham-lat deh hasab rasad rakba malkiat in possession of the proprietors of the village. petition under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 1948') was filed by some of the respondents before the additional director, consolidation seeking partition of the land alleging the same to be the land belonging to the right holders and not the gram panchayat. this petition was filed in the year 1995 and it is the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 14 2004 (HC)

Kirori Lal and ors. Vs. Ramu and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-14-2004

Reported in : (2004)138PLR612

surya kant, j.1. the petitioners herein filed a suit in representative capacity on behalf of all the co-owners of pana ahiran for declaration to the effect that they were owners-in-possession of agricultural land measuring 671 kanals 10 marias, fully described in para 1 of the plaint and, that the afore-mentioned land was erroneously mutated in favour of gram panchayat. the consequential relief of injunction to restrain the defendants from taking forcible possession of the suit land was also prayed for.2. learned civil court held that the previous decree dated 30.1.1980 restoring mutation in favour of the gram panchayat could not be set aside and thus impliedly held that the mutation in relation to ownership of the land was rightly sanctioned in favour of the gram panchayat. it, however, found that petitioners in possession of land and consequently passed a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiffs (including ali the co-owners of panna ahiran) forcibly from the suit land except in due course of law.3. feeling partly aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated august 10, 1987 passed by the learned trial court, the petitioners filed civil appeal no. 69/13 of 1987. this appeal, however, could not be filed within limitation prescribed in the limitation act, 1963. an application under section 5 of the act was, therefore, moved seeking condonation of delay, which according to the petitioners as also found by the first appellate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 2004 (HC)

Mohinder Singh and anr. Vs. Gurbax Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-01-2004

Reported in : (2004)138PLR154

satish kumar mittal, j.1. this judgment shall dispose of regular second appeals no. 1919 and 2384 of 1985, filed by defendant mohinder singh and plaintiff gurbax singh, respectively. both these appeals have arisen from the suit for possession filed by the plaintiff regarding the properties of one dasbndha singh claiming himself as his adopted son.2. the said dasondha singh was owner of the land measuring 40 bighas 15 biswas, a house and an electric motor, as mentioned in the plaint, which are the properties in dispute in the instant case. he died on 4.8.1980. on 6.9.1980, the plaintiff gurbax singh, who is sister's son of dasondha singh, instituted the present suit for possession of the aforesaid properties in dispute alleging therein that he was adopted by dasondha singh vide a registered adoption deed dated 3.2.1946 (ex.p3) as his son. after the adoption, dasondha singh treated him as his son and he also treated him as his lather. he continuously served him during his life time. it was further pleaded that after the death of dasondha singh, when the plaintiff approached to the patwari for entering the mutation of inheritance of the property of dasondha singh in his name, he came to know that the same was already got mutated by defendant mohinder singh in his name on the basis of two civil court decrees dated 15,3.1973 and 1.5.1974, which were suffered by dasondha singh in his favour collusively on the basis of an alleged family settlement. the plaintiff gurbax singh also .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2004 (HC)

Smt. Gayatri Jain, P.C.S. Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-20-2004

Reported in : (2005)140PLR225

satish kumar mittal, j.1. petitioner, who has retired as additional secretary to government of punjab on september 30, 2001, has filed this petition under section 482 cr.p.c. for quashing of f.i.r. no. 43 dated 30.5.2002 under sections 408, 420, 487, 468, 471 and 120b i.p.c. and sections 13(1)(a)(d), 13(2) of prevention of corruption act, 1988, registered with vigilance bureau, patiala.2. in the year 1997, the petitioner was posted as additional director consolidation, punjab, empowered with powers of the state government under section 42 of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the consolidation act). on 24.6.1977, when she was so posted, the proprietors of village sekhon majra filed a petition under section 42 of the consolidation act against the gram panchayat for re-distribution of the bachat land. their claim was that during the consolidation, the department of consolidation imposed pro rate cut on the proprietors under rule 16(ii) of the east punjab holdings (consolidation and prevention of fragmentation) rules, 1949. after utilising part of the land for the common purpose, some land remained unutilised, which was not to be transferred and could not have been vested in the gram panchayat and the same was liable to be re-distributed among the proprietors. the said petition was allowed by the petitioner vide her quasi judicial order dated 24.6.1997 while holding that the aforesaid bachat land does .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 2004 (HC)

Rayat Educational and Research Trust Vs. P.S.E.B.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-04-2004

Reported in : AIR2004P& H230; (2004)137PLR370

s.s. nijjar, j.1. with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at the motion stage.2. the petitioner-ray at educational and research trust (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner-trust') had purchased land from m/s nam agro inputs pvt. ltd. and m/s futuristic enterprises ltd. (formerly known as m/s gelatin products of india ltd.) vide two sale deeds. the petitioner challenges the impugned orders/letters issued by the respondents (annexures p4, p5, p9 and p10), whereby certain amounts have been sought to be recovered from the petitioner on the ground that the aforesaid amounts were due to the punjab state electricity board by the sister concern of the firm from which the petitioner had purchased the land. the bills of electricity pertained to m/s shivalik fertilizers ltd.3. the petitioner-trust was set up in march, 2000 with the object of imparting education to students in the rural area. it has established rayat institute of engineering and information technology. the institute has been set up in an area of approximately 100 acres of land on the state highway ropar-balachaur at village rail majra, district nawanshahar. on deposit of requisite charges with the respondents-punjab state electricity board (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondents-board'), the petitioner was released electric connection bearing account no. nrs/gf-48/59 with a sanctioned load of 150.290kw. during construction of the various buildings of .....

Tag this Judgment!

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