Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

OM PARKASH versus BHUPINDER SINGH

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Om Parkash v. Bhupinder Singh - COCP-409-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 1116 (23 February 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.409 of 2005

DATE OF DECISION:27.2.2006

***

Om Parkash

..PETITIONER

VS.

Bhupinder Singh

..RESPONDENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR,

Present:- Mr.B.S. Mittal,Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr.Vinish Singla,Advocate

for the respondent.

***

JUDGMENT:

On 1.10.2004, a Division Bench of this Court has disposed of CWP No.15537 of 2004, directing the respondent to decide representation of the petitioner in the light of relevant law. Rules and instructions by passing a speaking order within three months of the receipt of a copy of this order. It was further directed that in case any amount is found due to the petitioner, the same was required to be paid to him within one month thereof. When the needful was not done, the petitioner filed the instant contempt petition. In reply to the notice to show cause, the stand taken by the respondent is that a speaking order (Annexure P-2) has been passed and the respondent decided to pay Rs.30,000/- per month from January, 2005. However, the stand taken at the time of hearing before this Court is that the petitioner has been paid whole amount of Rs.4,61,750/-.

Mr.Vinish Singla, Advocate, on instructions from Sh.Bhupinder Singh, Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Mour, has stated that the aforementioned amount includes interest @ 12%. He has further stated, on instructions, that if the petitioner has any other grievance then the same can also be looked into by the respondent, if a representation to that effect is made.

In view of the above, the order stands complied with. The petitioner is permitted to file a representation in case any dues are still outstanding. Rule is discharged.

February 27,2006 (M.M. KUMAR)

Jiten 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.