Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: punjab and haryana Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 176 results (0.038 seconds)

Feb 16 2003 (HC)

Cyril Archibong Vs. State of Union Territory

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-16-2003

Reported in : 2003(88)ECC133

..... ; om parkash had given the house to dr. obisisqsang ojo, amadhi and david through the appellant and since they could not pay the rent and as the appellant was a mediator, the inspector compelled him to pay the rent which he denied; the inspector misappropriated rs. 20,000 out of rs. 80,000 recovered from the house of the appellant as ..... sho, the latter had confiscated their articles and told that the articles would be returned only if rs. 25,000 is paid to him; that since the appellant was a mediator, he was falsely implicated in this case by the sho.20. jassica (dw-3) is the wife of the appellant, who has stated that on 19.11.1998 in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 2003 (HC)

Smt. Parkash Kaur Vs. Harbhajan Dass

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-28-2003

Reported in : AIR2003P& H191; II(2004)DMC410; (2003)134PLR500

..... the matrimonial home. this was about 5/6 months after she had been turned out. in response to this letter, the uncle of the respondent namely shanker and surjan the mediator to the marriage between the parties accompanied by other persons came to see ram kishan, sarpanch of village kotla. thereafter all of them went to the house of the appellant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 2003 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Nazar Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-10-2003

Reported in : (2003)134PLR227

r.l. anand, j. 1. this is a defendants appeal and has been directed against the judgment and decree dated 10.12.1979, passed by the court of learned district judge, bhatinda, who, dismissed the appeal of union of india by affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.1.1975 passed by the court of sub judge, 1st class, bhatinda who had decreed the suit of the plaintiffs s/shri nazir singh, nagar singh and gurcharan singh and granted a decree for declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners of the suit land being a bona fide purchasers for valuable consideration from shri hansa singh and a decree for permanent injunction was also passed against the defendant-appellants directing them not to interfere in the possession of the plaintiffs who have become the owners of the suit land. 2. the brief facts of the case are that hansa singh son of kaja singh son of bogha singh purchased the suit land for a sum of rs. 6000/- in a public auction from government of india through tehsildar (sales) on 2.1.1965 and the area purchased was 71 kanals 10 marlas fully described in the head note of the plaint and entered as per jamabandi for the year 1964-65, situated in village jai singh wala tehsil and district bhatinda. the entire sale consideration was paid to the rehabilitation department as a result of which shri hansa singh became the full fledged owner. mutation of the land purchased was also effected and sanctioned in his favour by the collector on 1.10.1966. subsequently, hansa singh sold .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 10 2003 (HC)

Jagjit Singh and anr. Vs. Dalip Kaur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-10-2003

Reported in : (2003)135PLR558

viney mittal, j. 1. having remained unsuccessful before the two courts below, the plaintiffs jagjit singh and amrik singh sons of pal singh have now filed the present regular second appeal. the judgments and decree passed by the learned courts below have been challenged by them. 2. certain facts be noticed.one labh singh had two sons namely pal singh and kartar singh. kartar singh died in the year 1948 leaving behind his widow dalip kaur and his son surjit singh. however, dalip kaur remarried after the death of kartar singh and as such the estate of kartar singh was succeeded by surjit singh his son. the aforesaid surjit singh also died in the year 1964. the property left behind by surjit singh was mutated in the name of dalip kaur (his mother).3. the present suit for permanent injunction has been filed by jagjit singh and amrik singh for restraining defendant no. 1 dalip kaur from alienating any part out of the land measuring 148 kanals 13 marlas and also not to interfere into their possession. the plaintiffs being sons of pal singh have claimed that their grandfather labh singh had already died in pakistan and his land was mutated in the name of pal singh and kartar singh. it has been further stated by the plaintiffs that after the death of kartar singh his estate was inherited by his son surjit singh only since dalip kaur had relinquished her right on the ground that she had remarried. the plaintiffs have claimed that since surjit singh also died in the year 1964 and he .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 2003 (HC)

Devi Ram Vs. Shanti Devi

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-12-2003

Reported in : (2004)137PLR552

kiran anand lall, j.1. by this judgment, i will disposing of a regular second appeal of devi ram plaintiff-appellant and the cross objections of shanti devi defendant-respondent. learned first appellate court had accepted appeal of shanti devi defendant against the decretal of suit by trial court and dismissed the suit but while doing so, it also recorded a finding that the defendant-respondent was also not entitled to inherit any share in the property left by smt. badami.2. in the suit plaintiff had claimed a declaration to the effect that he is owner in possession of the land in dispute, due to being legal heir of smt. badami and also on the basis of a will made by her in his favour on 7.5.1946 'in a partition file no. 20 decided on 7.5.1946'. he had also claimed consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering in his possession over the land. pedigree-table of the plaintiff, as given in the plaint, was as under :- chet ram | ----------------------------------- | | | chiranji lal kallu radhhey lal | | | badami devi ram shiv charan widow (plaintiff) | ved ram 3. it was pleaded in the plaint that defendant was not related to badami, in any way, and therefore, she had no concern with her inheritance. but she had fraudulently got sanctioned mutation (bearing no. 1252) of smt. badami's inheritance in her favour, to the extent of 1/4th share, on or about 16.10.1962. this mutation came to the notice of the plaintiff just before the filing of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 17 2003 (HC)

Ajaib Singh and ors. Vs. Sohan Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-17-2003

Reported in : (2003)134PLR223

hemant gupta, j. 1. this is defendant's appeal wherein the estate left by deceased smt. taro daughter of kharak singh of village mucchal is in dispute. 2. briefly the facts are that smt. taro was married to one jit singh @ chet singh. she has 1/5th of share in the land measuring 60 kanals situated in village mucchal i.e. the village of her parents i.e. from her father's brother. she had some land in the village bhalojala i.e. village of her husband. she died on 4.1.1971 without leaving behind any child. her husband has pre-deceased her. the revenue authorities sanctioned mutation of her estate of village mucchal i.e. her parents village in the name of her real sister smt. dhano whereas mutation in respect of village situated in bhalojala i.e. husband's village was sanctioned in favour of husband's brother's son santa singh. smt. dhano sold the property situated at village, mucchal in favour of defendant-appellant and santa singh sold the said property situated in village mucchal in favour of present plaintiff. santa singh also relied upon a will dated 13.11.1970 in respect of land situated at mucchal. 3. both the courts have returned a concurrent finding of fact that smt. taro has not executed a will dated 13.11.1970. thus, the only question which arises is whether husband's brother son i.e. santa singh will succeed to the property of smt. taro situated at village mucchal or her sister dhano. the learned trial court decreed the suit relying upon section 15(1)(b) of the hindu .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 2003 (HC)

Devinder Singh Alias Dalvinder Singh and ors. Vs. Mansha Singh and ors ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-21-2003

Reported in : AIR2003P& H166

m.m. kumar, j.1. this second appeal filed by the defendant-appellants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26-11-2002 passed by the additional district judge. sangrur upholding the judgment and decree dated 24-5-2000 passed by the civil judge (jr. division). malerkotla. the civil judge vide her judgment and decree has decreed the suit of plaintiff-respondent nos. 1 to 3 and has passed a decree for possession by way of specific performance of agreement to sell dated 31-5-1990 on payment of balance sale consideration after adjusting the advance money of rs. 85,250/- within two months. it was further directed that on receiving the balance sale consideration, defendant-respondent nos. 4 to 6 would execute the sale deed in favour of plaintiff-respondent nos. 1 to 3 according to terms and conditions of the agreement to sell. the defendant-appellants who were the subsequent purchasers were directed to join the conveyance deed. the findings recorded by the civil judge were affirmed by the additional district judge.2. brief facts of the case necessary to decide the controversy raised in the present appeal are that defendant-respondents nos. 4 to 6 were the owner of the suit land as they had purchased the suit property vide registered sale deed dated 23-6-1983 from one ralkiat singh s/o santa singh. mutation in the name of the defendant-respondents nos. 4 to 6 was sanctioned. in pursuance of agreement to sell dated 31-5-1990, defendant-respondents agreed to sell the suit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 2003 (HC)

Balwinder Singh Vs. Sukhbir Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-22-2003

Reported in : II(2003)DMC783; (2003)135PLR166

hemant gupta, j.1. the husband has filed the present appeal challenging the order passed by the learned trial court granting a sum of rs. 2500/-per month as maintenance to the wife under section 25 of the hindu marriage act.2. the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce on 17.9.1997. thereafter, the wife moved an application under section 25 of the hindu marriage act (hereinafter referred to as the act) for the grant of permanent alimony in the sum of rs. 5000/- and for an order that payment may be secured by a charge on the immovable property of the husband. along with the application under section 25 of the act, the respondent-wife also moved an application for the grant of ad-interim maintenance. it was pleaded by the wife that she has no movable or immovable property and has no source of income, whereas the daughter damandeep is getting education in lkg. it was alleged that the respondent is a commission agent in selling turi. barsim and other fodder articles and also a permanent property dealer. he is also cultivating agricultural land owned by him in village jamalpur leli and his income is more than rs. 15,000/- per month.3. in reply, the husband has stated that he is neither a commission agent nor selling articles as mentioned by the wife nor is a property dealer. it was mentioned that he is an agriculturist and has marginal share in the joint agricultural land with his brothers and me income of the respondent is hardly rs. 1000/- per month. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 2003 (HC)

Karan Singh and ors. Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-23-2003

Reported in : II(2003)BC657; [2003]114CompCas311(P& H)

adarsh kumar goel, j.1. respondent no. 1, punjab and sind bank, filed a suit for recovery alleging that the defendants failed to repay the loan taken against mortgage of property. on january 18, 1989, the suit was decreed and in the judgment, it was made clear that the bank will be at liberty to realise the decretal amount by sale of the mortgaged property. the said clause was also incorporated in the decree drawn up. the decree became final.2. in execution proceedings, the property was ordered to be auctioned on september 5, 1994. the objections were filed by the present appellants stating that they were bona fide purchasers without notice of the mortgage and this fact came to the notice of the appellants only on the date of the auction and they filed objections before the tehsildar on the same day. the further objection was that the property was worth more than rs. 25 lakhs and was sold only for rs. 7.50 lakhs and the sale was the result of a fraud.3. the decree-holder bank filed reply to the effect that the property was the property of the judgment debtor and was duly mortgaged with the bank and the objectors were not the bona fide purchasers. the auction purchaser gur-bachan kaur, respondent no. 8, appeared through her attorney and husband kartar singh, respondent no. 7 and submitted that charanjit singh, husband of objector satwinder kaur, was the attorney of judgment debtor sat dev singh and had moved an application on may 16, 1989, under order 9, rule 13 read with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 29 2003 (HC)

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

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-29-2003

Reported in : (2003)134PLR581

n.k. sodhi, j.1. one wali mohammad son of gulam bakhash, resident of village bhekhowal, tehsil and district hoshiarpur was the owner of agricultural land measuring 83 kanals 5 marlas (hereinafter referred to as the land in dispute). he had mortgaged the same with three persons, namely, rur singh son of disa singh, dalip singh so of rur singh and ghasita ram son of rur singh who are the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners herein. wali mohammad migrated to pakistan at the time of the partition of the country in the year 1947. dalip singh and ghasita ram filed an application in the year 1965 before the assistant custodian, punjab with a request that they be declared owners of the land in dispute on the basis of the mortgage which was more than 60 years old as the same had not been redeemed. it is the case of the petitioners that this application was rejected on the ground that 60 years had not expired when the evacuee interest (separation) act, 1951 (for short the 1951 act) had come into force. the predecessors-in-interests of the petitioners are also said to have made an application to the tehsildar (sales), hoshiarpur for the transfer of the land in dispute to them at the reserved price on the basis of some instructions dated 6,7.1963. this application, too, was dismissed. on the death of dalip singh and ghasita ram, the petitioners were entered as cultivators in possession of the land in dispute and the centra! government was shown as the owner thereof and this is .....

Tag this Judgment!


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