Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.31 seconds)
Ranjana Devi vs Union Of India And Ors on 21 August, 2017 cites

Jaswinder Kaur vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd & Ors on 24 July, 2015

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana, to whom the petitioner has made a representation on 5.7.2017, is directed to proceed forthwith for grant of interim compensation of `1 lakh in terms of the instructions dated 9.11.2016 and the Punjab State Legal Services Authorighty to pay `1 lakh to the petitioner forthwith as has been directed in the order passed in CWP No.2178 of 2017 titled as "Jaspinder Kaur Vs. State of Punjab and others" on 7.2.2017." Thereafter, after completion of service, the Deputy Commissioner, Ludhiana filed the reply.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 5 - D Sibal - Full Document

Laxmi Shankar Pandey vs Union Of India And Ors on 19 March, 1991

Initially, when the Government of Punjab floated the Scheme on 12 of 14 ::: Downloaded on - 26-08-2017 08:22:18 ::: CWP No.15430 of 2017 [ 13 ] ***** 08.12.2011, it did not look into the injuries and sufferance of the acid attack victims but on 17.06.2013, issued another notification and decided to give `3,00,000/- as compensation to the victim of acid attack on account of disfigurement of face and `50,000/-for other injuries. Still, it did not think of the expenses to be incurred in such cases by the survivors of the acid attack on their medical treatment. Thereafter, on 05.03.2014, the Government of Punjab issued another notification and decided to give 100% medical reimbursement of all treatment including plastic surgery. This was perhaps done after an interim order was passed by the Supreme Court on 18.07.2013 in Laxmi's case (supra). Prime Minister office has also given priority to the acid attack victims and provided an additional compensation of `1,00,000/-, over and above the amount of compensation, under the Central Government Victim Compensation Fund Scheme so that poor persons, like the petitioner, may not have to think that they/she should not have survived.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 56 - S R Pandian - Full Document
1