Baljinder Singh @ Bittu vs State Of Punjab on 28 September, 2011
four years and a fine of Rs.5,000/- for an offence punishable under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.2,000/- for an offence punishable under Section 324 IPC.
Desh Raj vs Bodh Raj on 30 November, 2007
This statutory appeal under section 116A of the Representation of People Act 1951, is filed by an Election Petitioner against the judgment dated 7.6.2005 of the Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissing his Election Petition No.1 of 2003 challenging the election of the respondent (Bodh Raj) as Member of Legislative Assembly from 35-Gangath (SC) Assembly Constituency.
Dropti Devi & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors
In view of the above, the leave to make additional prayer for quashing the detention order dated September 23, 2009 by means of criminal miscellaneous application does not deserve to be granted and is rejected
Ghanshyam Das Gupta vs Makhan Lal on 21 August, 2012
Some High Courts had taken the view that it was open to the appellate court to consider the appeal on merits, even though there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant at the time of hearing. Some High Courts had taken the view that the High Court cannot decide the matter on merits, but could only dismiss the appeal for appellants default. Conflicting views raised by the various High Courts gave rise to more litigation. The Legislature, therefore, in its wisdom, felt that it should clarify the position beyond doubt.
DALJIT SINGH GREWAL Versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
we direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to reconsider the claim of the appellant in the light of our findings and reasons recorded on the contentious factual and legal aspects so that he could get higher post of Battalion Commander notionally to get pensionary benefits as he has been prematurely retired from service on 31.7.2007; and The said direction shall be complied with within 8 weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order and extend all the consequential benefits for the purpose of fixing his pensionary benefits and other monetary benefits for which he is legally entitled to and submit the compliance report to this Court.
Inder jeet Khurana Versus State of Haryana
In view of the rejection of all contentions, these appeals are dismissed as having no merit. Parties to bear their respective costs. h
Karan Singh & Anr vs State Of Haryana
Judgment:In view of the above, we do not find any force in the appeal, which lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed.