Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.28 seconds)
Documents citing Prem Chand Garg vs Haryana State Industrial Development ... on 22 February, 2006

Ved Parkash And Others vs Rajpal And Others on 15 October, 2019

In support of his submissions, learned counsel relied upon M.P. Steel Corporation vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2015(3) R.C.R. (Civil) 965; Sunder Das and others vs. Gajananrao and others, 1997 AIR (SC) 1686; Ghasi Ram vs. Chait Ram Saini, 1998(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 45; M/s Sonia Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others, 2015(1) R.C.R. (Civil) 114; Jagdish Kumar and another vs. Devinder Kumar and others, 2006(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 52; Harbhagwan vs. Punni Devi, 1992(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 298; Bharat Singh vs. Deena, 1992(2) PLR 326; Gunwantbhai Mulchand Shah & Ors. vs. Anton Elis Farel & Ors., 2006(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 251; Gannmani Anasuya & Ors., vs. Parvatini Amarendra Chowdhary & Ors., 2007(3) R.C.R. (Civil) 381; Kalvakurti Venkata Subbaiah vs. Bala Gurappagari Guruvi Reddy, 6 of 15 ::: Downloaded on - 20-10-2019 09:53:22 ::: RSA No.740 of 2013 (O&M) 7 1999(3) R.C.R. (Civil) 607; Raghbir Singh vs. Sant Singh, (2019-1)193 PLR 493; Gurjit Singh and another vs. Tarsem Singh and another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Civil) 53; R. Lakshikantham vs. Devaraji, 2019(3) Civil Court Cases 622; Amarjit Sikngh vs. Anil Kumar etc., 2019(3) Civil Court Cases 146; Mulakh Raj vs. Kishan Kaur and Ors., 2014(37) R.C.R. (Civil) 52: and Prem Chand vs. Haryana State Industrial Development Corpn. Ltd. and Ors., 2006(2) R.C.R. (Civil) 468.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 1 - R M Singh - Full Document

Zile Singh And Another vs Avtar Singh And Others on 10 November, 2009

In Prem Chand's case [supra], the dispute was that before which Court, an application for making the Award rule of the Court, would be maintainable. It was held at one stage that such application would be maintainable before the High Court as the respondents have Civil Revision No. 6499 of 2009 [13] stated before the High Court that the matter stands referred to an Arbitrator, whereas earlier in a Civil Suit challenging the resumption order, proceedings were stayed in view of the arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties. Such disputed question in respect of the Court before whom application would be maintainable was said to be bona-fide and thus, the period was ordered to be excluded under Section 14 of the Act.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 2 - H Gupta - Full Document

Sukhdev Singh vs Gurmail Singh And Others on 12 January, 2011

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the defendant- petitioner was under bonafide mistake that he has to file written statement alongwith C.R. No. 8398 of 2010 [2] other defendants No.2 and 3 who had not been served by the date when the defence of the petitioner was struck off. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Prem Chand Vs. Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, 2006 (2) RCR (Civil) 468 in support of his contention that supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India can be exercised at any time and there is no limitation for exercise of such jurisdiction especially when the order passed by the Court below is patently illegal and wrong on facts of law.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - M M Bedi - Full Document
1