Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE GUJJARPUR KALAN COOP. LABOUR AND CON versus SHRI BHUSHAN KUMAR, EXECUTIVE OFFICER

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


The Gujjarpur Kalan Coop. Labour and Con v. Shri Bhushan Kumar, Executive Officer - COCP-1085-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 5124 (1 August 2006)

COCP No.1085 of 2005 -: 1 :-

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No.1085 of 2005

Date of decision: August 8, 2006.

The Gujjarpur Kalan Coop. Labour and Construction Society Limited ...Petitioner(s)

v.

Shri Bhushan Kumar, Executive Officer

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Sanjay Nagpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Vinish Singla, Advocate for the respondent.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

The petitioner-society filed CWP No.16098 of 2004, which was disposed of by this Court on October 12, 2004 with a direction to take a decision on the legal notice already served by the petitioner, by passing a speaking order within two months.

It is not disputed that in compliance to the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the respondents issued letter dated December 17, 2004 (Annexure P-3) whereby, upon consideration of the petitioner's claim, it was held that the society is entitled to be paid a sum of Rs.1,30,711/- and since a sum of Rs.1 lac had already been paid to the society, the balance amount shall be paid very soon.

In response to the show cause notice, the respondent has filed an affidavit, which is taken on record. In the said affidavit, it has been mentioned that balance amount of Rs.30,711/- has also been paid to the COCP No.1085 of 2005 -: 2 :-

petitioner-society vide cheque No.260199 dated January 3, 2005, which has been duly credited to the account of the petitioner on January 27, 2005.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, states that the petitioner-society is entitled for some more payments.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner's claim, as ordered by this Court, has been considered by the respondent, and the claim by the petitioner-society for some additional amounts is being seriously disputed by the respondents, this petition is disposed of with liberty tot he petitioner to have recourse to appropriate remedy for recovery of the balance amount, if any.

Disposed of.

Rule discharged.

August 08, 2006. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan 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.