Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2012 DAILYLAW 2000 (PNJ)

GURJEET SINGH v. RAJESH CHAUDHARY

COCP/1700/2026 · 2026-04-16

Vikram Aggarwal

Contempt Petitionbody2012

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

                               !"#$$ #$$%&    '  () "$&!$$$ *      '&+             ,-$.- /,./ $+    $ #$.      "$*$+ /,,/!-    000       1$  2+ + 33# 4333 -         ,5 +CWP-24987-2012; “Petitioner has served as a daily wager for 4 ½ years therefore, he is entitle only for compensation. The compensation amount awarded by the Industrial Tribunal of Rs.15,000/- is unreasonable. The award dated 03.04.2012 required modification to the extent from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.2 lakhs. The respondents are directed to pay enhance compensation of Rs.2 lakhs within a period of 4 months from today. If the amount is not release within 4 months, the petitioner is entitled to interest @ 6% per annum on the above compensation amount.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though a cheque for a sum of Rs.2 lakhs was issued, the same was not encashed as the same was not accompanied with interest as ordered by the writ Court. 3. The order in question was passed as far back as on 04.07.2016. No details are forthcoming in the petition as to when the cheque was issued and when it was returned. Concededly, the contempt petition is barred by limitation in terms of the provisions of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. VIKAS CHANDER 2026.04.17 16.27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document             4. That being so, the instant contempt petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail all other remedies as shall be admissible in law.   #++3 /*/3+                       !"#$%&%$ .# # Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No   6$$  + -3   7)8  VIKAS CHANDER 2026.04.17 16.27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document