SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(P&H) 211

SURYA KANT, RAJ MOHAN SINGH
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Mahant Jatinder Dass Chela – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Addl. A.G., Punjab with Mr. Sunil Kumar Vashisht, AAG, Punjab.
For the Petitioner(s) in CWP Nos.18313 of 2006,
11136 of 2007, 9690 of 2008:Mr. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ankita Sambyal, Advocate.
For the Respondents in LPA Nos.541 & 793 of 1994:Mr. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ankita Sambyal, Advocate.
For the Petitioners in CWP Nos.3586, 3762, 14529,
14532 of 1996;15892 of 2004; 11537 of 2005; 2712 of 2008:Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1/private respondents in
LPA-542 & 543-1994, CWP-6988 & 10064-2008:Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate
For the Petitioners CWP-14844-1996:Mr. Salil Sagar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Samrath Sagar, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CWP No.4575 of 1991:Mr. Sanjay Kaushal, Senior Advocate with Mr. A.P. Setia, Advocate.
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.D. Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms. Bindu Goyal, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CWP Nos.18313 of 2006, 11136 of 2007:Mr. D.D. Gupta, Advocate & Mr. R.D. Gupta, Advocate.
For the Private Respondents in LPA-541, 793, 794-1994:Mr. D.D. Gupta, Advocate & Mr. R.D. Gupta, Advocate.
For the Petitioners in CWP No.1428 of 2010:Mr. Kanwalvir Singh Kang, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CWP Nos.3174 of 2008; 10438 of 2009:Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate.
For the Respondent in LPA No.797 of 1994:Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Senior Advocate with Mr. G.S. Benipal, Advocate, Mr. M.S. Brar, Advocate & Mr. A.S. Sandhu, Advocate.
For the Petitioner in CWP No.6988 & 10064 of 2008:Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.5 in CWP No.2712 of 2008:Mr. Vikas Jain, Advocate.
For the Respondent No.4 in LPA No.797 of 1994:Mr. Arun Jindal, Advocate & Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Surya Kant, J.: - We propose to decide LPA Nos.541, 542, 543, 793, 794 & 797 of 1994 preferred by the State of Punjab and its authorities and LPA No.1306 of 1994 filed by Mahant Madan Mohan Dass Chela Mahant Atma Dass, Mandir Thakur Dwara Bihari Dass Wala, Rajpura, Patiala along with CWP Nos.4575 of 1991; 3762, 3586, 14844, 14532 & 14529 of 1996; 5885 & 13515 of 1997; 15892 of 2004; 11537 of 2005; 18313 of 2006; 11136 of 2007; 3174, 6988, 10064, 2712, 9690 of 2008; 10438 of 2009; 1428 of 2010 by way of a composite order as the issues that arise for consideration in these cases are broadly common in nature. The brief facts of each case are also being distinctly noticed.

2. We also propose to treat LPA No.541 of 1994 as the lead case amongst the Appeals though the short order under appeal in that case dated 01.02.1994 draws its reasons from the judgement dated 14.01.1994 rendered by learned Single Judge in CWP No.7142 of 1992 (Dera Sullar, Tehsil and District Patiala vs. State of Punjab etc.) against which State of Punjab has preferred LPA No.542 of 1994. Similarly, amongst the writ petitions, we propose to treat CWP No.18313 of 2006 as the lead case wherein the petition












































































































































































































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top