Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (1.97 seconds)
Documents citing Swaran Kaur And Others vs Sukhdev Singh And Others on 6 August, 2010

Dr. B.M. Singh vs . State Of Haryana And Others on 23 January, 2013

In support of his case, he has relied upon two Division Bench decisions and Single Bench decisions of this Court in the cases of Asha Sharma and Ors. v. Sanimiya Vanijiya P. Ltd. and Ors., 162(2009) DLT 542; Competent Placement Services (Regd.) through its Director/Partner v. Delhi Transport Corporation through its Chairman, 2010(120) DRJ 323; Swaran Kaur and others v. Sukhdev Singh and others, CM No.8256-C-2010 in RSA-2718- 2010 decided on 06.08.2010; Gurbachan Singh v. Mastan Singh, 1984 PLR 438; Anarjit Singh Mann v. Nand Kishore and others, 2005(1) RCR (Civil) 451; Darshan Singh v. Surjit Singh, 2008(2) PLR 336; and Krishan Dev Dhiman v. Mahesh Bhatia, 2009(1) RCR (Civil) 229.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

***** vs Punjab State Civil Supplies ... on 14 January, 2014

The issue of condonation of delay in refiling the appeal has been decided by this Court in the case of "Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others" 2010 (4) PLR 484 after taking into account various decision rendered by this Court and other Courts and it was observed that "in order to succeed in the application for condonation of delay in re-filing, the applicant/appellant is required to make out a strong case in his application supported by an affidavit, either of the litigant or a person who knew about the facts of the case, only then the application would succeed and not on the basis of a casually drafted RSA No.123 of 2014 -3- application in which no particulars are given by the applicant/appellant which could constitute a 'sufficient cause'".
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Gurpal vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the CM No.9724-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3883 of 2010(O&M) **** reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Mehar Chand vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the CM No.9722-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3882 of 2010(O&M) ******* reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Sardari Lal vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin CM No.9720-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3881 of 2010 ****** to the reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Shero Devi vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the CM No.9734-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3888 of 2010 (O&M) ***** reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Shingaru Ram vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, CM No.9718-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3880 of 2010(O&M) the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Jeet Ram vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the CM No.9726-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3884 of 2010(O&M) ****** reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document

Chanan Ram vs Union Territory on 17 November, 2010

In this regard, this Court had already taken a view in CM No.8256-C of 2010 in RSA No.2718 of 2010 titled as 'Swaran Kaur and others Vs. Sukhdev Singh and others, decided on 06.08.2010, in which there was a delay of 1460 days in re-filing of the appeal and the reason given was akin to the CM No.9730-CI of 2010 in/and -2- RFA No.3886 of 2010(O&M) ******* reason assigned in the present application. In the present case, obviously, the appeal is re-filed only after the success of the other connected appeals, as alleged. Thus, the reason for not re-filing the appeal in time lacks bona fide.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - R K Jain - Full Document
1   2 Next