C.O.C.P. No.141 of 2008 Present: Shri Tara Chand Dhanwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let two copies of this petition be handed over to Shri R.S. Kundu, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 3.4.2008. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.142 of 2008 Present: Shri Puneet Bali, Advocate, for the petitioners. Let three copies of this petition be handed over to Shri R.S. Kundu, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 26.2.2008. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.144 of 2008 Present: Shri Gurcharan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let two copies of this petition be handed over to Shri S.S. Sahu, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 3.4.2008. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.145 of 2008 Present: Mrs. Adarshpal Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let notice of motion issue to the respondent to show cause as to why proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him, returnable on 3.3.2008. Personal appearance shall, however, remain exempt till further orders. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge C.O.C.P. No.146 of 2008 Present: Shri Umesh Narang, Advocate, for the petitioner. Let four copies of this petition be handed over to Shri R.S. Kundu, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, during course of the day, who shall have instructions in the matter on the adjourned date. Adjourned to 3.4.2008. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.143 of 2008 Date of decision: January 30, 2008. Roshan Lal ...Petitioner(s) v. Mai Chand & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest. Present: Shri C.B. Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - This Contempt Petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging that notwithstanding the order dated 1.5.2001 passed by this Court in CWP No.6148 of 2001, whereby the parties were directed to maintain status quo regarding possession, the respondents have forcibly trespassed the land in the possession of the petitioner and have destroyed the standing crops. Except the bald assertion of the petitioner, no material, whatsoever, has been brought on the record to substantiate the aforesaid allegation. Consequently, while disposing of this petition, liberty is granted to the petitioner to move an application before the Tehsildar, Samalkha (District Panipat) who, upon receipt of such an application, shall visit the spot and after holding inquiry, shall submit a fact-finding report as to whether or not there is some substance in the petitioner's allegations. The report shall be submitted by the Tehsildar, Samalkha within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The petitioner may thereafter approach this Court and/or seek any other appropriate remedy on the basis of outcome of the said report. Disposed of. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.62195-M of 2006 Date of decision: January 30, 2008. Nikhil Kumar Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Ramesh Kumar Mahajan ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest. Present: Shri S.D. Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Bindu Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. Naveen Malik, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - On the oral prayer made by Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Neelam Kumari, mother of the petitioner and wife of the respondent – Shri Ramesh Kumar Mahajan, working as an Assistant in the office of Haryana Police Housing Corporation, Panchkula, is ordered to be impleaded as petitioner No.2. Ms. Bindu Goel, Learned Counsel, accepts notice on her behalf. Registry is directed to carry out necessary correction in the memo of parties. In deference to the order dated 12.12.2007, the petitioner (Nikhil Kumar Singh) as well as his father (Ramesh Kumar Mahajan – the respondent) are present in Court. Similarly, the mother of the petitioner, namely, Smt. Neelam Kumari (who has been impleaded as petitioner No.2), as well as his maternal grand-father (Shri C.L. Katyal, Advocate) are also present in Court. With the able assistance of Learned Counsel for the parties, the controversy regarding payment of maintenance to the petitioner and his mother (i.e. Both the petitioners) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and/or interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the pending divorce petition filed by the respondent, stands amicably resolved in the following terms:- (i) henceforth, i.e., w.e.f. February 2008 onwards, the respondent has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month on or before the 10th day of each calendar month to his son , i.e., the petitioner No.1 towards educational and other related expenses; (ii) in addition, the respondent – Shri Ramesh Kumar Mahajan has further agreed to pay a lump sum amount of Rs.25,000/- per annum to the petitioner No.1 towards the additional/ancillary expenses, like purchase of books/instruments/apparatus, etc.; (iii) the parties are ad idem that the aforesaid arrangement, as carved out in agreed terms No. (i) and (ii) above, shall remain in vogue till the petitioner No.1 – Nikhil Kumar Singh completes education upto post-graduation level, viz, MS/MD; (iv) the mother of the petitioner No.1, namely, Smt. Neelam Kumari (petitioner No.2), who is present in Court along with her father Shri C.L. Katyal, Advocate, has graciously agreed not to claim any interim maintenance from the respondent in the petition for dissolution of their marriage filed by him and is pending in the court of learned District Judge, Chandigarh; (v) Smt. Neelam Kumari, the newly added petitioner No.2, has further agreed not to claim the maintenance of Rs.5,000/- already awarded to her under section 125 Cr.P.C. from her husband, namely, the respondent. In other words, the maintenance amounts awarded to petitioner No.1 and his mother by different courts have been clubbed and in lieu thereof the respondent shall henceforth pay only to his son, i.e., the petitioner No.1 in terms of agreed terms (i) and (ii) above; (vi) as far as the arrears of maintenance amounting to more than Rs.3.5 lacs, which the respondent is liable to pay to both the petitioners, are concerned, it is mutually agreed that the respondent shall pay a lump-sum amount of Rs.3 lacs only in lieu thereof to Smt. Neelam Kumari (petitioner No.2), within a period of one year in four equal installments of Rs.75,000/- each. The first installment of Rs.75,000/- shall be paid on or before 30.4.2008, the 2nd installment on or before 31.7.2008, the penultimate installment or or before 31.10.2008 whereas the 4th and the last installment shall be paid on or before 31.12.2008. Disposed of. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge Civil Revision No. of 2008 C.O.C.P. No. of 2008 Present: Shri , Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri S.S. Sahu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Shri R.S. Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Shri , Advocate, for the respondents. January 30, 2008. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge