Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1972 Page 7 of about 183 results (0.019 seconds)

Apr 03 1972 (HC)

Padam Parshad Vs. the Punjab National Bank Ltd.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-03-1972

Reported in : AIR1974P& H22

1. this second appeal arises out of a suit brought by padam parshad against the punjab national bank limited, karnal, for the recovery of rs. 284/-.2. the plaintiff's allegations were that he was a dealer in shoes and had sold 14 pairs worth rs. 259.25 to messrs. national shoe agency, amritsar. the shoes were packed in a box and despatched through the northern india goods transport company on 12th december, 1960. the goods were consigned to self and on the same day, he entrusted the receipt to the defendant-bank with a hundi for rs. 259-25 which was drawn against messrs. national shoe agency, amritsar. the instructions given to the defendant were that the amount covered by the hundi be collected from messrs. national shoe agency, amritsar, and the goods receipt then handed over to them. the goods did not reach the consignee and on enquiries it was found that somebody connected with the bank either at karnal or amritsar had stolen the said receipt and taken delivery of the shoes. the loss to the plaintiff had, thus, occurred on account of the gross negligence of the bank, and, therefore, it was liable to compensate him for the loss suffered by him.3. the suit was contested by the bank and it pleaded that the invoice was despatched from karnal by ordinary post under postal certificate and it was lost in transit from karnal to amritsar. when the same was in the custody the postal authorities. the defendant was, therefore, not responsible for the loss. the matter was later on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1972 (HC)

Raghbir Singh Vs. Satpal Kaur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-05-1972

Reported in : AIR1973P& H117

1. this is appeal by raghbir singh against his wife, shrimati satpal kaur. it is directed against the judgment of the district judge, amritsar dated january 31, 1966 dismissing petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 (hereinafter called the act) or dissolution of marriage filed by the husband against the wife.2. the parties were married at amritsar on june 22, 1948. after marriage both of them lived together in village roopowali, district amritsar, where the husband resided. they amicably lived together upto 1957. in that year, the husband remarried. the wife life the husband and started staying with her parents at amritsar. in 1957, the wife filed petition for judicial separation under section 10 of the act on the ground that the husband had remarried and deserted her. the husband was served in that petition. inspite of service, he did not appear in court. the petition was allowed ex parte and the relief of judicial separation sought for by the wife against the husband was decreed on july 9. 1958.3. in 1961, the wife filed a complaint against the husband under section 494 indian penal code on the ground that he had committed offence of remarriage during the life time of his previous wife. the husband was convicted and sentenced for offence of bigamy. after the filing of that complaint the wife filed an application under section 488. code of criminal procedure claiming maintenance allowance against the husband. that application was allowed on september 21, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1972 (HC)

The State of Punjab Vs. Land Acquisition Collector, Kapurthala and ors ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-06-1972

Reported in : AIR1973P& H29

order1. the land of the respondents was compulsorily acquired by the government under the land acquisition act, 1894 hereinafter called the act, presumably for some public purpose. the land acquisition collector gave his award regarding the said land on 30th october, 1970. dissatisfied with the award, the state of punjab moved an application under section 18 of the act on 28th april, 1971, for making a reference to the civil court for the reduction of the compensation amount. this application was rejected by the land acquisition collector on 3rd may, 1971, on the ground that it had been filed beyond limitation. against that order, the present petition under article 227 of the constitution has been filed by the state of punjab on 22nd november, 1971.2. a preliminary objection has been taken by the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner should have filed a revision petition under section 115, code of civil procedure, against the impugned order, as provided in section 18(3) of the act. the limitation for filing such an application is, admittedly, 90 days under article 131 of the limitation act, 1963. the said limitation being over, the state government has, therefore, chosen to make a petition under article 227 of the constitution.3. i find merit in this contention. section 18(3) of the act reads:--'18(3). any order made by the collector on an application under this section shall be subject to revision by the high court, as if the collector were a court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1972 (HC)

Tilak Ram and Sons Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-07-1972

Reported in : AIR1973P& H359

order1. on 1st april, 1942, the state of punjab obtained a money-decree for rs. 2661.15 paise against tilak ram and sons of ludhiana. this decree was confirmed by this court in second appeal on 13th february, 1962. thereafter, the decree-holder took out execution on 1st may, 1964. the execution application was dismissed in default on account of the non-appearance of the decree-holder on 5th october, 1968. the decree-holder on 8th october, 1968, filed a restoration application under order 9, rule 4, code of civil procedure. notice of this application was given to the judgment-debtor for 17th may, 1969. on that date the said application was also dismissed in default on account of the non-appearance of the decree holder and it was stated that the process-fee had not been filed by the decree-holder for effecting service on the judgment-debtor. on 19th may, 1969, another application under order 9, rule 4, code of civil procedure, was made for the restoration of the application dated 8th october, 1968, which had been dismissed in default on 17th may, 1969. it was stated therein that the restoration application was not listed in the cause list for 17th may, 1969. maharaj krishan, a clerk of the government pleader, ludhiana, then contacted the ahlmad and the reader of the court on behalf of the decree-holder for putting up the said application before the court. they replied that the file would be traced and the case would then be fixed for 7th june, 1969, for service on the judgment- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1972 (HC)

Hans Raj Vs. Som Prakash

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-07-1972

Reported in : AIR1973P& H245

order1. this is a tenant's revision petition against the decision of the appellate authority confirming on appeal, the order of the rent controller ordering his eviction.2. on 8-6-1962, the premises in dispute, which are situate in patiala, were rented out by its owner, som parkash to hans raj, at a monthly rent of rs. 33/50 for a period of 11 months and the tenancy had to start with effect from 1-6-1962. on 3-1-1969 an application for ejectment under section 13 of the east punjab urban rent restriction act, hereinafter called the act, was filed by the landlord against the tenant and the grounds for ejectment mentioned therein were four, viz. (i) personal necessity; (ii) that the tenant was in arrears of rent; (iii) that the tenant had materially impaired the value and utility of the premises; and (iv) that the tenant had used the premises for a purpose other than that for which it was leased.3. the rent controller ordered ejectment of the tenant on the ground that the premises were required by the landlord for his personal needs and also that the tenant had used the said premises for business purposes-a purpose other than that for which they were leased. since the arrears of rent had been paid by the tenant on the first date of hearing, that ground became non-available to the landlord. as regards the fourth ground, it was held that it had not been proved. when the matter came in appeal before the appellate authority he confirmed both the findings of the rent controller and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1972 (HC)

Nirvair Singh Vs. the Punjab State Electricity Board and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-11-1972

Reported in : AIR1973P& H322

order1. the petitioner joined service of punjab state electricity board as a lineman grade 1 on june 14, 1957, and was promoted to the rank of line superintendent on june 9, 1959. on may 9, 1961, he submitted his resignation to the chief engineer punjab state electricity board, patiala, through proper channel reading as under:--'as my family circumstances do not permit me to serve the board any longer i, therefore, tender my resignation with immediate effect from today i.e. 9th may, 1961 a. n. one month's pay as required under rules rs. 150.50(rupees one hundred and n. p. 50 only) has been deposited by me vide receipt no. 45/157 dated 9-5-1961.'this resignation was handed over to the executive engineer and the petitioner was relieved of his post. on may 11, 1961, he sent the following telegram to shri l. r. malik executive engineer, electricity board, chandigarh:'kindly reject resignation phonic request joining twelfth or thirteenth.'on may 13, 1961, the petitioner reported for duty and delivered to the executive engineer the following letter:'i beg to say that i have resigned my post as line supdt. grade ii on 9-5-1961 a. n. due to some family circumstances, for which i regret very much and request to return my resignation and accept my arrival report w. e. f. today (i.e. 13-5-1961 f. n.) on the same post.'on this letter the executive engineer made the following note:'i think he can withdraw his resignation before it is accepted. his joining report be provisionally accepted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (HC)

The Excise and Taxation Officer, Assessing Authority Vs. Kapoor Weavin ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

Reported in : [1973]31STC325(P& H)

..... same.6. this is a question of fact, which on good grounds has been found against the appellant by the learned single judge. that finding cannot be reopened in letters patent appeal. in any case, there is nothing on the record to show that any copy of the material collected by the assessing authority through the inspectorate staff, was communicated to ..... and, as a result, the writ petition was allowed and the impugned order dated 30th january, 1968, was quashed. that is how the assessing authority has come up in letters patent appeal before us.5. shri n. k. sodhi, the learned counsel for the appellant, has no quarrel with the principle that an order cancelling a registration certificate is a quasi ..... ranjit singh sarkaria, j.1.this is an appeal under clause x of the letters patent directed against a judgment, dated 7th december, 1970, of a learned single judge of this court.2. the petitioner-respondent obtained a registration certificate as a dealer under section 7 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (HC)

Om Prakash Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

Reported in : AIR1974P& H123

1. this order will dispose of civil writ 2690 of 1971, om parkash v. state of haryana, civil writ 2563 of 1971; udmi v. state of haryana, and civil writ 2757 of 1971; rai singh parmar v. state of haryana, as common questions of law and fact are involved in all these petitions.2. the petitioners have challenged the elections to various gram panchayats held in july 1971 on the ground that some of the persons who were allowed to vote were not entitled to be voters as they were either minors or were registered as voters in two constituencies whereas they could vote only in one constituency. it is pleaded that this mater cannot be agitated in an election petition and, therefore, a petition under art, 226 of the constitution is the only remedy available to the petitioners. it is denied by the respondents in their written statements that persons whose names are mentioned in annexure 'a' to each petition were not qualified to cast their votes at the election. under section 5(3) of the punjab gram panchayat act, 1952. 'every person who, for the time being, is entered as a voter on the electoral roll of the state legislative assembly for the time being in force, and pertaining to the sabha area, shall be a member of the sabha of that sabha area.' it is admitted by the petitioners that the persons to whose votes exception has been taken were entered in the assembly constituency electoral roll. that electoral roll could be amended in accordance with the provisions of the representation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (HC)

Shibcharan and anr. Vs. the State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

Reported in : AIR1972P& H479

order1. this order will dispose of civil writ no. 4031 of 1971, shibcharan v. state of haryana and civil writ no. 4030 of 1971, ram chander v. state of haryana as common question of law and fact arises in these petitions.2. the petitioner in each of these petitions has challenged the election of panches to the gram panchayat of his village on the ground that one of the panches elected was not duly qualified for election. admittedly the remedy of filing an election petition was available to the petitioner in each case but that remedy was not availed of. the elections were scheduled to be held on july 2, 1971, while the writ petitions were filed on august 24, 1971, after the period of 30 days prescribed for filing an election petition had expired. the petitions were returned to the learned counsel because of some defects. they were refiled on september 1, 1971, but all the defects had not been removed. they were again returned and were refiled on september 29, 1971, but still they were not complete. they were again returned and refiled on october 12, 1971, and were admitted on october 19, 1971. it is thus evident that the petitioners deliberately allowed the period of limitation prescribed for filing an election petition to expire without taking any action in the matter. the writ petitions were filed after the filing of the election petitions had become barred by time. in these circumstances, i do not consider that these are fit cases which should be entertained and decided on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (HC)

Tarsem Kumar Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Chandigarh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

Reported in : AIR1972P& H444

order1. the petitioner was intercepted near the beas bridge by the customs officers on august 23, 1970, at about 5.a.m while he was going in ambassador car no. dha 567 to amritsar side. the car was being driven by gurnam singh were taken to the customs house at amritsar at about 6 a.m. the petitioner was found in possession of 10 gold guineas bearing the effigy of king edward vii and indian currency notes of different denominations amounting to rs. 93,500 were found tied in a canvas bag from under the seat of the driver. the currency notes, the gold guineas, the canvas bag and fourteen documents recovered from the petitioner along with the car were taken into possession by the superintendent customs by recovery memo, copy of which is annexure 'a' to the writ petition. the value of the car was stated as rs. 20,700. two cases were registered against the petitioner-one under the customs act, 1962 and the other under the gold control act, 1968. the seizure of the goods mentioned above including the currency notes and the ambassador car was made under section 115 of the customs act. no notice was issued to the petitioner on or before february 23, 1971, on which date the period of 'six months of the seizure of the goods' expired. it is alleged on behalf of the respondents that an order granting extension of time by a further period of two months i.e. up to april 22, 1971, for the issue of show-cause notice in respect of the aforesaid seized goods, was granted by the collector, .....

Tag this Judgment!


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