COCP NO. 1224 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr. V.K.Sandhir, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.R.V.S Chug, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 9 * * * As per the office report, respondent Nos. 1 to 9 have been served whereas respondent No.10 could not be served as no such person was found posted at the given address. As requested by the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 9, adjourned to 19.2.2007. Meanwhile, reply, if any, be filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to furnish correct address of respondent No. 10 along with process fee within one week and thereafter notice be issued to the said respondent for the date fixed. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 669 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Puneet Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.A.S.Gill,Advocate for the respondents * * * Reply on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 filed in Court has been taken on record. As requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, adjourned to 19.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1383 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.B.S.Saini, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. K.S.Kahlon, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 * * * Reply has not been filed on behalf of the respondent. As requested by the learned counsel for the respondent, last opportunity is granted to file the reply. Adjourned to 22.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1350 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.N.D.Achint, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. Ashok Verma Advocate for the respondent * * * As requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, adjourned to 26.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1134 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.A.S.Jattana, Advocate for the petitioner * * * As per the Office report, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 could not be served as they have been transferred whereas respondent No.3 has died. The name of respondent No.3 is directed to be deleted from the array of the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner may furnish correct address of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 within two weeks and thereafter, fresh notice be issued to them for 22.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya C.R. NO. 3037 OF 2004 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Vinod S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner * * * Admitted. Interim order to continue. To be listed for final hearing within one year. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya Crl.Misc. NO. 61446-M OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Rahul Rathore, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.R.D.Sharma, DAG Haryana. Mr.G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the complainant. * * * With a view to enable the learned counsel for the parties to address this Court in the light of the latest judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, adjourned to 21.12.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 511 of 2006 Date of Decision: 5.12.2006 Surjit Singh ...........Petitioner Versus D.P.S.Kharbanda ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Present: Mr.Rajinder Sharma,Advocate,for the petitioner. Mr.Sandeep Khunger,Advocate,for the respondent * * * Surya Kant, J. Reply-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent is taken on record. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent that the order dated 24.10.2005 passed by this Court has been complied with. In this view of the matter, no further action is required to be taken up in this case which is, accordingly, disposed of. Rule is discharged. (Surya Kant) Judge December 05,2006 arya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 299 of 2006 Date of Decision: 5.12.2006 Anil Kumar Chopra ...........Petitioner Versus Mohinder Parkash Chopra ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Present: Mr.Ashok Bector,Advocate,for the petitioner. Mr.Tribhuvan Singla,Advocate,for the respondent * * * Surya Kant,J. This contempt petition has been filed, inter-alia, alleging wilful breach of interim order dated 24.1.2005 passed by this Court in Civil Revision No. 480 of 2005 whereby status quo regarding possession was directed to be maintained. It is not disputed that the aforesaid revision petition has now been finally disposed of vide order dated 20.4.2006 with a direction that the parties to the suit shall maintain status quo with regard to possession of the house in dispute. The petitioner is none-else than son of the respondent. It is not in dispute that one of the vacant shop which is a part and parcel of the subject property, has been rented out by the respondent in order to earn livelihood. The respondent is stated to be an old person of 84 years of age. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the age of the respondent and the nature of relationship between the parties and keeping in view the fact that the respondent has rented out COCP No. 299 of 2006 -2- the shop to sustain himself, this contempt petition is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Barnala and Sub Registrar, Barnala that no document/deed or any other instrument of any kind, in respect of the property in question, shall be registered at the instance of the respondent and no encumbrance of any type upon the house in dispute shall be permitted to be created. Necessary entries to this effect are directed to be made in the municipal/official records pertaining to the property in dispute. It is made clear that in the event of non-compliance of the above directions, the Officers, referred to above, shall be personally responsible along with respondent. The aforesaid direction shall,however, continue to operate till the controversy with regard to the nature and/or ownership of the property in dispute is decided by the learned Civil Court. Rule discharged. Let a copy of this order be handed over to Sh.G.S.Cheema, learned Sr. DAG Punjab for information and necessary action at the hands of the authorities concerned. (Surya Kant) Judge December 05,2006 arya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 265 of 2006 Date of Decision: 5.12.2006 Ishwar Singh ...........Petitioner Versus Bhaskar Chatterjee & others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Present: Mr.I.S.Gujral,Advocate,for the petitioner. Mr.R.D.Sharma, AAG Haryana * * * Surya Kant,J. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that in compliance to the order dated October 6, 2005 passed by this Court in CWP No. 16134 of 2005, a speaking order dated 11.10.2006 (Annexure R1) has been passed, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to impugn the said order before appropriate forum, if so advised. (Surya Kant) Judge December 05, 2006 arya COCP NO. 921 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Harsh Bunger, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.G.S.Cheema, Sr. DAG Punjab * * * In reference to order dated 9.10.2006, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that the civil suit filed by the petitioner has already been dismissed for non-prosecution. In this view of the matter, I do not deem it appropriate to continue with the contempt proceedings which are accordingly dropped. Rule discharged. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 842 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Ms.Moninder Kaur, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. G.S.Cheema, Sr.DAG Punjab * * * There is again request for adjournment by the learned State Counsel, for filing reply. In the interest of justice, and as a last opportunity, adjourned to 16.1.2007. It is made clear that in case the directions issued by this are not complied with before the adjourned date, the respondent shall remain present in Court to pay exemplary costs from their own pocket. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1018 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Mohd. Yusuf, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.G.S.Cheema, Sr.DAG Punjab * * * Reply filed by respondent No.3 is taken on record. Having regard to the reply and letter dated 30.11.2006 purported to have been written by the petitioner (Annexure R 3/3T), it appears that the petitioner is not keen to join as Guest Faculty Lecturer in Government College, Nabha (Patiala) for the reasons that he has got a better alternative employment, In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of as having become infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to get the same revived, if so required or advised. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 255 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.R.K. Malik, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A.S.Virk, Advocate for the respondents. * * * After arguing the case for some time, learned counsel for the respondents seeks a short adjournment to comply with the directions issued by this Court, however, subject to the final outcome of the Special Leave petition filed in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Adjourned to 22.1.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1520 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.A.P.Singh Luna, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. Ashok Rawat, Advocate for Mr.Anupam Gupta, Advocate * * * In response to the show cause notice, learned counsel for the respondent has handed over a photo copy of the result notification dated 7.11.2006 which is taken on record. In this view of the matter and direction issued by this Court having been complied with, no further action is required to be taken in this petition. Disposed of. Rule discharged. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No. 1515 of 2005 Date of Decision: 5.12.2006 Kanwar Balu Singh &others ...........Petitioner Versus Shri Shri Prem Parshant and others .......... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Present: Mr.Vikas Jain,Advocate,for the petitioners. Mr.R.D.Sharma, AAG Haryana * * * Surya Kant,J. It is stated that the order passed by this Court has since been complied with by passing an order Annexure R.1 dated 17.6.2006. In this view of the matter, no further action is required to be taken in this petition. Disposed of. Rule discharged. (Surya Kant) Judge December 05,2006 arya IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Revision. No. 6 of 2005 Date of Decision: 5.12.2006 S.K.Kaushal ...........Petitioner Versus V.K.Kaushal & others ..........Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Surya Kant Present: Mr. S.K.Kaushal, petitioner in person. Mr.Arun Palli,Advocate,for the respondents * * * Surya Kant,J. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 17.9.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagadhri whereby, an application under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure moved by the petitioner-plaintiff for amendment of the suit, has been dismissed. The petitioner has filed a suit for declaration and joint possession to the effect that he has 9/40th share in the disputed property. By way of above stated application, he wanted to amend the suit in order to seek alleged consequential relief of possession by way of partition of the subject property. The above stated application has been dismissed by the learned Civil Court after observing that if the amendment is allowed, it will completely change the nature of the suit. Aggrieved, the plaintiff-petitioner has preferred this revision petition. C.R. No. 6 of 2005 -2- I have heard the petitioner in person and Sh.Arun Palli, learned counsel for the contesting respondents at length and perused the impugned order. One of the primary contention raised by the petitioner is that in order to avoid multiplicity of litigation, the proposed amendment ought to have been allowed by the learned trial Court, more so when the respondents are likely to dispose of the subject property thereby pre- empting the petitioner from seeking effective relief of actual physical possession by way of partition, if he succeeds in the present suit. Having regard to the nature of amendment sought by the petitioner in a suit which is pending since the year 1994, I am of the view that no exception can be made to the views taken by the learned trial Court. Undoubtedly, the proposed amendment would change the nature of the suit. As regard the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that the respondents by alienating the subject property may furstrate the nature of relief which he ultimately desires to seek, there appears to be some substanace in the said contention for the reason that if the subject property is alienated and third party rights are created, it will complicate the issues and might cause avoidable delay in adjudication of the ongoing litigation. Consequently, without interfering in the impugned order dated 17.9.2004, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction that till the final decision of the civil suit, the respondents shall not alienate the subject property and/or a part thereof without seeking prior approval of the learned Civil Court. As and when an application is moved by them for such permission, the learned trial Court is directed to give an advance notice to C.R. No. 6 of 2005 -3- the petitioner and thereafter only appropriate orders shall be passed. With these directions, the revision petition is disposed of. (Surya Kant) Judge December 05,2006 arya COCP NO. 777 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr. N.R.Dahiya, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.R.N. Lohan,Advocate for the respondents * * * It is stated by the learned counsel for the parties that unfortunate matrimonial dispute have since been amicably settled and pursuant thereto, the petitioner is not interested to pursue this petition. Dismissed as withdrawn. Rule is discharged. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO.256 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr. R.S.Bajaj, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. * * * Reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 5 is taken on record. Adjourned to 15.2.2007 for arguments. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1155 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr. Karnvir Singh, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.R. D. Sharma, DAG Haryana. Mr.Deepak Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2 * * * In deference to order dated 31.10.2006, learned counsel for respondent No.2 has handed over the cheque bearing No. 393824 dated 5.12.2006 in the sum of Rs. 58940/- towards arrears of pay to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State has filed a short reply by way of affidavit of Mr. K.K.Khandelwal, IAS which is taken on record. Along with the said affidavit, a copy of order dated 26.10.2006 has been appended whereby some adverse decision appears to have been taken against the petitioner. In this view of the matter and having regard to the fact that arrears of salary have been paid to the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to impugn the order dated 26.10.2006 before an appropriate forum, if so advised. Rule discharged. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 618 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.R.D.Sharma, AAG Haryana. * * * Reply filed on behalf of respondent is taken on record. It is stated that the next meeting of the Board of Administrator is now fixed for 5.12.2006. Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that the petitioner shall appear for personal hearing before the Appellate Authority on the said date. In view of above, if petitioner appears, let the appeal be decided by the Board of Director on the date fixed. However, in no circumstances, the decision on the appeal shall be deferred beyond 31.12.2006. With these observations, this petition is disposed of. Rule discharged. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 261 OF 2006 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.P.N. Makani,Advocate, for respondent No.3 * * * As per the Office report, respondent Nos. 1 and 3 have been served whereas respondent No. 2 has been transferred. Respondent No. 1 is, however, neither present in person nor is represented by any one despite service. Let bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety of the like amount be issued through CJM Gurdaspur to secure the presence of respondent No.1 on the date fixed. Let correct address of respondent No.2 be given and thereafter notice be issued to him for 12.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1514 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Arvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.P.S.Ranu,Advocate for respondent No.1 * * * As requested on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, adjourned to 22.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya COCP NO. 1252 OF 2005 * * * PRESENT: Mr.Navrattan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Surinder Singh,Advocate for the respondent * * * As requested on behalf of the petitioner, adjourned to 20.2.2007. ( Surya Kant ) December 05, 2006 Judge arya