Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up : May 30 - June 5, 2022

Nominal IndexMunshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and Another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121Sharma Constructions Joint Venture Versus Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and another 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 122Gurmahabir Singh v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 123Paramjeet @ Kala and Other v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 124Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 125Bhakra Beas Management Board & another Versus Jagdish Ram 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 126Ayyub Khan and Anr v. Pratap Gurjar and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 127Rohtash @ Raju v. State of Haryana 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 128Lawrence Bishnoi v. State of Punjab and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 129Malook Singh v. State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 130Manpreet Kaur Versus Gurbaksh Singh 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 131 Mukesh Mittal Versus National Faceless Assessment Centre and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 132Ishiqa @ Yashika Vs State of Haryana and others 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 133Om Roj v. Haryana Staff Selection Commission and Ors. 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 134Judgments/ Orders of the Week 1. Authorities Under Rent Act To Only Ascertain If Premises Are Bonafidely Required By Landlord, Can't Embark On Roving Enquiry: Punjab & Haryana HC Case Title: Munshi Ram versus Vidya Devi and Another Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 121 The Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with a revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Rent Controller whereby the application for directing the respondents-landlord to produce relevant documents in their possession was dismissed, has held that the present petition is nothing but an endeavour to embark on an endeavour not relevant to the matter in dispute. A Court would not embark on a roving and fishing enquiry in order to assist a party to collect evidence. 2. Persons Ineligible To Participate In Tender Process Can't Overcome Disqualification By Entering Into Joint Venture: Punjab & Haryana High Court Case Title: Sharma Constructions Joint Venture Versus Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. and another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 122 Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an order vide which Sharma Constructions Joint Venture was declared technically non-compliant for e-tender floated by Punjab Agro Industries for the supply of gypsum for agriculture use, on the ground of being ineligible. The Court noted that the expert committee of the authorities had examined the issue detail and found the petitioner to be ineligible. The bench observed that a perusal of the Joint Venture Agreement would indicate that there is no clause indicating as to who would be managing the Joint Venture. On the contrary, the document indicates that in spite of constituting the so called Joint Venture, the constituents/ proprietors would continue to manage their own separate firms. 3. Convict's Sentence Enhanced My Modifying Trial Court Judgment Under Reader's Signature: Punjab & Haryana HC Asks Appellate Court To Conduct Inquiry Case Title : Gurmahabir Singh v. State of Punjab Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 123 Punjab and Haryana High Court recently came across a case where the original order of conviction passed by the Trial Court was modified under the signature of the Reader of the Court, during the pendency of an appeal preferred by the convict against the said judgment, thereby enhancing the sentence of the convict from 2 months to two years, held that though all these points need to be decided by the Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran, who herself is administrative head of the Sessions Division, Tarn Taran and on the face of it, it requires an inquiry as to how the corrections were made under the signatures of the Reader of the Court concerned, thereby enhancing the sentence, though in the original order, passed by the trial Court, it was only directed that instead of Section 323 IPC, which is mentioned at two places, Section 326 IPC be substituted at one place and there was no such direction to enhance the sentence from 02 months to 02 years. 4. S.145 Evidence Act | Attention Of Witness Must Be Drawn To Previous Statement If It Is To Be Used For Purpose Of Contradicting Him: P&H High CourtCase Title : Paramjeet @ Kala and Other v. State of Haryana Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 124 The Punjab and Haryana High Court while dealing with an appeal filed by three appellants against the order whereby they were convicted for robbery, if the witness was not confronted with that part of the statement with which the defence wanted to contradict him, then the Court cannot suo moto make use of statements to police not proved in compliance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act that is, by drawing attention to the parts intended for contradiction. 5. Widow Can't Claim Inheritance Of Property Through Natural Succession If Husband Was Not Owner Of Suit Land On Date Of His Death: P&H High Court Case Title : Jaswant Kaur v. Lakhwinder Singh and others ...

Punjab & Haryana High Court Weekly Round-Up : May 30 - June 5, 2022

Drishti Yadav

Tags