{"id":205250,"date":"2009-05-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009"},"modified":"2019-01-18T13:05:31","modified_gmt":"2019-01-18T07:35:31","slug":"union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009<\/div>\n
Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                   1\n\n\n\n\nIN   THE     HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                    CHANDIGARH\n\n\n\n                                       Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002\n                                       Date of decision 22.5.2009.\n\n\nUnion of India\n\n                                         ...... Petitioner.\n\n  versus\n\n\nM\/s Bawa Jasbir Singh\n\n                                       ...... Respondent.<\/pre>\n
Present :   Mr. S.K.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr. P.S.Rana Advocate for the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
\nL.N.MITTAL,J.(Oral)<\/p>\n
             This is revision petition by Union of India having remained<\/p>\n
unsuccessful in both the Courts below. Respondent-Contractor M\/s Bawa<\/p>\n
Jasbir Singh executed some work of the petitioner-Union of India. Disputes<\/p>\n
arose between the parties. The said disputes were referred to Arbitrator.<\/p>\n
The Arbitrator made his award dated 18.5.1993 awarding various amounts<\/p>\n
to the Contractor against different claims made by the Contractor. The<\/p>\n
Contractor filed application under Section 14(2) and Section 17 of the<\/p>\n
Arbitration Act, 1940 ( in short – the Act) for directing the Arbitrator to file<\/p>\n
the award and for making award as rule of the Court. The petitioner filed<\/p>\n
objections under Section 30 of the Act against the award of the Arbitrator.
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                    2<\/span><\/p>\n
Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chandigarh vide judgment dated<\/p>\n
16.3.2001 dismissed the objections of the petitioner-herein and made the<\/p>\n
award of the Arbitrator as rule of the Court.      Appeal preferred by the<\/p>\n
petitioner stands dismissed by learned Additional District Judge,<\/p>\n
Chandigarh vide judgment dated 3.6.2002. Feeling still aggrieved, the<\/p>\n
instant revision petition has been preferred by Union of India.<\/p>\n
              I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the<\/p>\n
case file.\n<\/p>\n
              Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the amounts<\/p>\n
awarded by the Arbitrator under claim Nos.5,7 and 22 of the Contract.<\/p>\n
Under claim No.5, the Arbitrator allowed Rs.7181.71ps. for increase in the<\/p>\n
number of bricks used in the septic tank. This claim is alleged to be<\/p>\n
factually incorrect because vide deviation order No.21 dated 31.8.2005, cost<\/p>\n
of these bricks had been paid to the Contractor. This objection of the<\/p>\n
petitioner cannot be entertained as it relates to disputed question of fact.<\/p>\n
The finding of the Arbitrator cannot be set aside by Court on disputed<\/p>\n
question of fact.\n<\/p>\n
              Under claim No.7, the Contractor raised claim of Rs.25,000\/-<\/p>\n
for increase in the price of bricks. The Contractor revised his claim to<\/p>\n
Rs.53,980\/-. The Arbitrator has awarded Rs.43,726.50ps. The petitioner<\/p>\n
alleged that increase in price of bricks took place on 16.9.1983 and by then<\/p>\n
6,18,000     bricks had already been utilized and thereafter only 2,90,000<\/p>\n
bricks were purchased by the Contractor. However, award of the Arbitrator<\/p>\n
is non speaking and, therefore, it cannot be discerned therefrom as to for<\/p>\n
how many bricks claim of the Contractor has been allowed. Consequently,
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                  3<\/span><\/p>\n
this objection of the petitioner also cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
            Under claim 22, the Contractor claimed Rs.1,87015\/- on<\/p>\n
account of increase in price of diesel and petrol. The Arbitrator allowed<\/p>\n
Rs.86,884\/- against this claim of the Contractor.       The objection of the<\/p>\n
petitioner is that diesel and petrol were not incorporated in the Contract but<\/p>\n
still the claim has been allowed. However, this objection relates to factual<\/p>\n
controversy, which cannot be gone into by the Court. The award of the<\/p>\n
Arbitrator on this aspect cannot be set aside on this ground.<\/p>\n
             Last objection of the petitioner relates to claim No.10. The<\/p>\n
Contractor claimed Rs.3,50,000\/- as damages for delay in execution of the<\/p>\n
work. The Contractor revised the claim to Rs.3,93,117\/-. The Arbitrator<\/p>\n
has allowed Rs.1,12,000\/- to the Contractor        against this claim.    The<\/p>\n
contention of the petitioner is that the Arbitrator has committed legal<\/p>\n
misconduct in allowing this claim because clause 11(C) of the Contract<\/p>\n
specifically provides that no claim in respect of compensation or otherwise,<\/p>\n
howsoever arising, as a result of extension granted under conditions (A)<\/p>\n
and (B) shall be admitted.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that in<\/p>\n
view of specific clause 11(C) in the Contract, the Arbitrator could not have<\/p>\n
allowed Rs.1,12,000\/- as damages or compensation to the Contractor for<\/p>\n
delay\/extension in the execution of the work. It was also contended that the<\/p>\n
Contractor was granted extension twice on his own request without any<\/p>\n
financial implication and the Contractor accepted the same. Reliance in<\/p>\n
support of this contention has been placed on a judgment of the Apex Court<\/p>\n
in the case of Ramnath International Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
India and Anr. AIR 2007 Supreme Court 509 and also on a judgment of this<\/p>\n
Court in the case of M\/s Chaudhary Construction Company v\/s Union of<\/p>\n
India and others Civil Revision No.2728 of 1995 decided on 21.5.2007<\/p>\n
wherein certain other judgments namely Jaswant Singh vs. Union of India<\/p>\n
and others (C.R.No.4064 of<\/a> 2001, decided on 04.10.2002), Union of India<\/p>\n
vs. M\/s Harbhajan Singh reported as (2007-1) Punjab Law reporter 299,<\/p>\n
Union of India vs. M\/s Om Construction Company<\/a> reported as 1997 (1)<\/p>\n
RCR (Civil) 143 were also referred to. In all these judgments, same clause<\/p>\n
11(C) of the Contract      was interpreted    and   award of the Arbitrator<\/p>\n
regarding grant of compensation on account of prolongation of the Contract<\/p>\n
was set aside being in violation of the aforesaid clause and thereby the<\/p>\n
Arbitrator was held to have committed legal misconduct in granting the said<\/p>\n
claim of the Contractor.\n<\/p>\n
              On the other hand,      learned counsel for the respondent-<\/p>\n
Contractor contended that since the award is non speaking, the Court<\/p>\n
cannot go into mental process of the Arbitrator in granting the disputed<\/p>\n
claim of the Contractor. Reliance in support of this contention has been<\/p>\n
placed on judgment of this Court in Union of India and another vs. Sabboo<\/p>\n
Mal and Sons and another 2003(2) RCR (Civil) 431. Learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the respondent also contended that scope for interference in the case of<\/p>\n
non-speaking award is very limited. Reliance in support of this contention<\/p>\n
has been placed on judgment of Hon’ ble Apex Court in the case of Karam<\/p>\n
Singh Lal vs. Union of India and others 2002(1) Arb.LR 224 (SC) wherein<\/p>\n
also similar clause 11 of the Contract was interpreted.<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the respondent also argued that scope for
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                 5<\/span><\/p>\n
interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is very limited. Reliance<\/p>\n
has been placed on a judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satna Stone &<\/p>\n
Lime Co.Ltd.M.P. vs. Union of India & Another etc. 2008 (3) RCR (Civil)<\/p>\n
226 wherein it was held that scope of the interference by Court in award<\/p>\n
given by the Arbitrator is limited. Reliance has also been placed on the<\/p>\n
judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Sutlej Construction Company Pvt.Ltd.<\/p>\n
vs. State of Punjab 2001(3) RCR (Civil) 151 wherein it was observed that<\/p>\n
Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil<\/p>\n
Procedure cannot give its own interpretation to the terms and conditions of<\/p>\n
the Contract but can correct only jurisdictional error committed by the<\/p>\n
Arbitrator.\n<\/p>\n
              On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner cited<\/p>\n
judgment of this Court in the case of M\/s AKM Constructions & Engg.<\/p>\n
Company vs. Commander Works Engineer               2007(1) RCR (Civil)86<\/p>\n
wherein it was observed that even if it is non speaking award, if the claims<\/p>\n
awarded by the Arbitrator are contrary to the terms of the Contract on the<\/p>\n
face of the record, the Court is not precluded from interfering with such an<\/p>\n
award. The contention that it is not open to the Court to attempt to probe<\/p>\n
into the mental process of the Arbitrator where the award is non speaking<\/p>\n
will not apply in such a case.\n<\/p>\n
               I have very carefully considered the rival contentions and<\/p>\n
perused the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the parties.<\/p>\n
              Clause 11(C) of the Contract is very clear and categorical. It<\/p>\n
provides that no compensation whatsoever shall be admissible to the<\/p>\n
Contractor as a result of extension of time granted for execution of the
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
Contract. In view of the plain and unambiguous language of the clause,<\/p>\n
the Arbitrator could not have granted amount of Rs.1,12,000\/- to the<\/p>\n
Contractor under this head. The Arbitrator by doing so has committed legal<\/p>\n
misconduct and, therefore, award of the Arbitrator is prone to interference<\/p>\n
by this Court. This conclusion is strengthened by latest judgment of the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Ramnath International Construction Pvt.<\/p>\n
Ltd. (supra) and other judgments referred to hereinabove.<\/p>\n
            No doubt, scope of interference by Court in the award of the<\/p>\n
Arbitrator is very limited. There is also no doubt that scope of interference<\/p>\n
in exercise of revisional jurisdiction is also limited. However, when there<\/p>\n
is jurisdictional error by the Arbitrator or there is legal misconduct, Court<\/p>\n
can always interfere with the award under Section 30 of the Act and even<\/p>\n
this Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction can interfere with the award<\/p>\n
of the Arbitrator in such a situation. In the instant case, the Arbitrator<\/p>\n
committed legal misconduct by awarding amount of Rs.1,12,000\/-to the<\/p>\n
Contractor under the aforesaid head, which could not have been awarded at<\/p>\n
all in view of categorical provision in the Contract. Award of the said<\/p>\n
amount being contrary to the express condition of the Contract contained in<\/p>\n
clause 11(C) thereof, the Court not only has jurisdiction but also owes a<\/p>\n
duty to interfere with the award of the Arbitrator to the extent of the said<\/p>\n
amount.\n<\/p>\n
            In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed partly<\/p>\n
and impugned judgments of both the Courts below are modified to the<\/p>\n
extent that the respondent-Contractor shall not be entitled to the amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,12,000\/- awarded by the Arbitrator as damages\/compensation for
\n Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002                               7<\/span><\/p>\n
extension of time in the execution of the Contract whereas judgments of the<\/p>\n
Courts below in respect of the other   amounts awarded by the Arbitrator<\/p>\n
are upheld.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                               ( L.N.MITTAL )
\n                                                   JUDGE
\nMay 22, 2009
\nsv\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4259 of 2002 Date of decision 22.5.2009. Union of India …… Petitioner. versus M\/s Bawa Jasbir Singh …… Respondent. Present : Mr. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-205250","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUnion Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1597,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union Of India vs M\\\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009"},"wordCount":1597,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009","name":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-18T07:35:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-vs-ms-bawa-jasbir-singh-on-22-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union Of India vs M\/S Bawa Jasbir Singh on 22 May, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205250","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=205250"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/205250\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=205250"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=205250"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=205250"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}