KUNJ LAL Vs. BALBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice of motion was issued in this case as it was brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in Sadhir Ram V. Gajju and others, 1974 PunLJ 15 and Banarsi Dass Kanshi Ram V. Ram Singh and others, 1974 PunLJ 54, a contrary view has been taken by the learned Single Judges of this Court. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find that in Banarsi Dass's case , the learned Single Judge while deciding the matter did not take into consideration the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Punjab V. Lal Chand and another,1964 PunLR 670, which authority has been followed by the learned Single Judge in Sadhir Ram's case . The finding in Lal Chand V. Arya Pritinidhi Sabha and another, 1962 0 CurLJ 454, was reversed by a Division Bench in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Punjab's case . The Division Bench authority was not followed by the learned Single Judge. In this view of the matter, the proposition of law is well settled by a Division Bench of this Court in Arya Pratinidhi Sabha Punjab's case .

(2.) It is contended by Mr. B.S. Malik that the petitioner should be allowed fresh opportunity to lead evidence as the matter was disposed of by the Assistant Collector on the ground that the complainant had no jurisdiction to move the Court. We do not find any merit in this contention. The parties were given full opportunity to adduce evidence and no case is made out for allowing fresh evidence. Dismissed.