Blogs about: Karnal
Featured Blog
Tattered Fairy
As she was approached him with a measured slowness; she enjoyed seeing his reaction to her. She could taste his skin through the air; heard his heartbeat. She sensed his fear but yet she also felt h… more →
Kali's Heart
Karnal - The home of Raja Karna
wrote 1 month ago: Karnal is also known as Kurnal is a district in Haryana. It is situated 124 km from Delhi the capita … more →
images of conference and newspaper cuttings of predictions
wrote 3 months ago: … more →
Festival Discount Offer on Carefit Beds like Ceragem Migun Korean Massage Bed
wrote 6 months ago: … more →
Day 3.....Kurukshetra
wrote 11 months ago: Day 3 of the trip. Have been based in Haridwar till now but its time to move on…last morning a … more →
Future philanthropist athlete of India
wrote 12 months ago: (photograph by nickolai hammar) Many young children all around the world dream of becoming famous at … more →
Celebrity
wrote 1 year ago: I’ve never been in a spotlight so bright. That’s true for this entire trip, really … more →
Lesbian wedding in Ambala
wrote 1 year ago: Neha and Poonam, who are cousins, had run away from their homes, have now solemnised their wedding. … more →
River Watch
wrote 1 year ago: A small boy’s small feet kicked up bursts of water as he darted to the middle of the river. A … more →
Nadi Pariksha Workshop
— 2 comments
wrote 1 year ago: Nadi Pariksha Workshop This is a 6 day Residential course . You can learn basics of Ayurveda, the di … more →
Hybrid(T) vs Karnal(CT) 9-6 on de_nuke
wrote 1 year ago: Sorry for this coming quite late but the review on Hybrids road to Karnal cup 2012 continues with th … more →
Karnal Cup 2012
wrote 1 year ago: Finally concluding on Sunday, at the Wangsa Maju Orange branch a very successful tournament indeed. … more →
Weekend Getaway
— 3 comments
wrote 1 year ago: First of all I want to thank Aman Sood for an amazing weekend, for a great stay at Chandigarh with h … more →
Soon, a roof for homeless kids
wrote 1 year ago: TIMES OF INDIA GURGAON: On the occasion of Children’s Day, the district administration announc … more →
MP girl sold for Rs 90,000, found
wrote 1 year ago: HUMAN TRAFFICKING NEWS IS A SHAKTI VAHINI NATIONAL LEGAL RESEARCH DESK INITIATIVE THE TRIBUNE / Jind … more →
Karnal - a page from my life's diaries
— 1 comment
wrote 1 year ago: This was posted as a note on my facebook page. The fact that this pic was taken in Karnal keeps brin … more →
"Indian Limitation Act, 1908--S. 4, 14, 15(a) read with S. 80 of the Civil Procedure Code--Whether the Notice period to the Railways is to be excluded for the purpose of limitation. =Art. 22, Indian Limitation Act, 1908, provides a period of one year for a suit for compensation for injury to the person from the date when the injury was sustained. In the present case, the injury was sustained by the Appellant on January 1, 1958, while travelling by train from Ambala Cantt.. to Delhi and the suit should have been filed on January 1, 1959; but as the Appellant had to serve a notice under S.80 of the C.P.C. before filing the suit, the notice was served on the General Manager on December 29, 1958. The suit was originally filed in Karnal Court on March 2, 1959 as March 1, 1959 was a holiday. Later, the suit was transferred to the Sub-Judge's Court at Panipat which by its order returned the plaint for presentation to the proper Court, as the Mohri Railway Station where the injury was sustained, was outside the jurisdiction of that Court. The plaint was, ultimately, filed before SubJudge's Court at Ambala. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground of limitation and the High Court also confirmed the decision. Before this Court, Counsel for the appellant raised the following points :-(1) The suit could not have been instituted without giving 2 months' notice U/S 80 of C.P.C. and if this period of 2 months is excluded for the purpose of limitation, 'the suit was within time. (2) that if the Karnal Court was not the proper Court in which the suit should have been filed, the appellant was entitled to the benefit of S.4 of the Limitation Act; (3) that the Karnal Court had jurisdiction to entertain the plaint and therefore, that was the proper Court for the purpose of S. 4 of the Act; (4) that under S. 14 of the Act, the Appellant was to get the benefit of excluding the period during which he was prosecuting the suit at Karnal and Panipat. Dismissing the appeal, HELD : (i) S.80 of the C.P.C. provides, among other things, that no suit shall be instituted against the Railways until the expiration of two months after notice in writing has been delivered. S.80 only prescriber, a condition precedent for the institution of the suit and has nothing to do with the period of limitation for a suit. The appellant cannot wait till the 29th of December 1958 as the period of limitation was to expire on January 1, 1959. [687B] (ii)Section 4 of the Limitation Act provides that where the period of limitation prescribed for any suit expires on a day when the Court is closed, the suit may be instituted on the reopening day. In the present case, if the Karnal Court was not the proper Court, the plaintiff would not be entitled to the benefit of S.4. He can get the benefit of S.4 only if the suit were filed in the proper Court. [687E] Maqbul Ahmed and Others v. Pratap Narain Singh and Others, 62 I.A. 80, referred to. 685 (iii)The appellant cannot get the benefit of s. 14 of the Limitation Act because even if the appellant was entitled to get an exclusion of the time during which he was prosecuting the suit in the Kemal and Panipat Court, the suit would not be in time as the filing of the suit in the Karnal Court was beyond the period of limitation. [688B-C] (iv)Further, the appellant's contention that the filing of the suit at the proper Court at Ambala was a continuation of the suit filed at Karnal and Panipat, has no force, because when the plaint was returned for presentation to the proper Court and was presented in that Court, the suit can be deemed to be instituted in the proper Court only when the plaint was presented in that Court. The suit instituted at the proper Court at Ambala was not a continuation of the suit filed in the Karnal Court. [688E] Hirachand Succaram Gandhy & Co. v. G.I.P. Ry. Co. A.I.R, 1928 Bombay 421; Bimla Prasad Mukerji v., Lakshmi Devi & Ors. A.I.R. 1926 Calcutta 355 and Ram Kishun v. Ashirbad, I.L.R. 29 Patna, 699, referred to. (v)Whether Karnal Court was the proper Court and had jurisdiction entertain the plaint or not in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant had never raised these contentions before the trial Court or in the High Court. Therefore, be cannot be allowed to raise these points for the first time before this Court. [690A]
wrote 1 year ago: Image via Wikipedia PETITIONER: AMAR CHAND INANI Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA DATE OF JUDGMENT13/1 … more →
It's the season of change.
— 5 comments
wrote 1 year ago: ‘Change is constant’ – It may sound like a cliché but it is an undeniable aspect o … more →
Cops bust bride trafficking ring in Haryana
wrote 1 year ago: DWAIPAYAN GHOSH IN TIMES OF INDIA HUMAN TRAFFICKING NEWS IS A SHAKTI VAHINI NATIONAL LEGAL RESEARCH … more →
Track Your PF Provident Fund Account Balance Online
— 5 comments
wrote 1 year ago: As you already know, it is too difficult and involves a lengthy process to enquire about your own PF … more →
