Oral judgment dismissing a petitioner's claim regarding interest on a refunded amount. The court noted the claim was already considered and held that the previous order stood composite, leaving the petitioner's right to challenge unaffected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Raj Kumar Arora 2013.09.05 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
COCP-817-2013 (O&M). Decided on: September 2, 2013.
D.S.Gill
..... Petitioner
Versus
Devender Kumar
..... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI
PRESENT Mr.Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.P.S.Poonia, Advocate, for the respondent.
M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
Claim of the petitioner has already been considered vide order dated 27.8.2013 by the Chief Engineer (Op), UHBVN, Rohtak, holding that the petitioner has no claim on the interest of the amount refunded to him as the recovery was made after following due procedure of law finding him negligent in discharge of his duties in defending the case at DCDRF, Sonipat. However, the petitioner is not satisfied with the order dated 27.8.2013.
In view of above circumstances, as the order passed by this Court has been complied with, this petition stands disposed of. However, the disposal of this petition will not prejudice the rights of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 27.8.2013, in accordance with law .
(M.M.S. BEDI)
JUDGE
September 2, 2013. rka
Raj Kumar Arora
Devender Kumar
M.M.S. Bedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
