Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THAKUR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Thakur Singh v. Union of India & Anr - RSA-126-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 1054 (21 February 2006)

IN THE COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA NO.126 of 2005

DATE OF DECISION: March 3, 2006

Thakur Singh

....Appellant

VERSUS

Union of India and another

.....Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
PRESENT: Shri G.L.Bajaj, Advocate for the appellant.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

The plaintiff has lost before the two Courts below. He filed a suit for declaration claiming that transfer order of defendant No.2 Paramjit Kaur was illegal, wrong and liable to be set aside. It was claimed by the plaintiff that Paramjit Kaur had been appointed after the death of Amarjit Singh, son of the plaintiff, on compassionate grounds. At that point of time, a bond was also executed by the aforesaid Paramjit Kaur and the plaintiff had stood as a guarantee that Paramjit Kaur would serve at least for a period of five years at Ferozepur.

In these circumstances, the plaintiff claimed that Paramjit Kaur could not have been transferred from Ferozepur to Chandigarh.

The defendants contested the suit and maintained that the transfer of Paramjit Kaur was absolutely legal and valid and as per rules.

Both the Courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff had no locus standi to file the suit in question, since transfer order of Paramjit Kaur, defendant No.2 could not be challenged by the plaintiff in any manner. Additionally, it has been held that transfer of Paramjit Kaur, defendant No.2, was absolutely legal and as per rules. The suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the learned trial Court and his appeal failed before the learned First Appellate Court.

After perusal of the findings recorded by the two Courts below and having taken into consideration the nature of controversy raised by the plaintiff, it is apparent that the suit filed by the plaintiff was absolutely frivolous and an effort made by him to misuse the process of law.

Nothing has been shown that the findings of fact recorded by the learned Courts below suffer from any infirmity or are contrary to the record.

No question of law, much less any substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal.

Dismissed.

March 03, 2006 (Viney Mittal)

KD Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.