{"id":51090,"date":"2009-11-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009"},"modified":"2017-08-19T22:09:19","modified_gmt":"2017-08-19T16:39:19","slug":"chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009<\/div>\n
     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n\n                        CHANDIGARH.\n\n                                    R.S.A. No.305 of 1987 (O&M)\n                                     Date of decision: 04.11.2009\n\nChand Krishan Khosla\n                                                     -----Appellant\n                              Vs.\nState of Punjab & others.\n                                                  -----Respondents\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL\n\nPresent:-   Mr. Pradip Bhandari, Advocate\n            for the appellant.\n\n            Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Addl.A.G., Punjab\n            for respondent No.1.\n              ---\n\n\nORDER:\n<\/pre>\n
1.          This appeal has been preferred by the defendant<\/p>\n
against decree granted by the courts below for recovery of<\/p>\n
Rs.9170.19 with simple interest @ 8% from 1966 to 1979.<\/p>\n
2.          Case of the respondent\/plaintiff, State of Punjab,<\/p>\n
was that land of the defendants was waste land.             Under<\/p>\n
campaign to grow more food, the land was reclaimed by the<\/p>\n
Agricultural Department, by giving contract to a private company<\/p>\n
and paying the reclamation charges. After reclamation, the land<\/p>\n
was returned to the defendants and their share for reclamation<\/p>\n
charges was sought to be recovered from them in accordance
\n RSA No.305 of 1987                                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
with the statutory provisions but on account of technical reasons,<\/p>\n
recovery could not be made. The defendants derived benefit<\/p>\n
from the reclamation but declined to make the payment. They<\/p>\n
were liable to pay the said amount under Section 70 of the<\/p>\n
Indian Contract Act, 1872.\n<\/p>\n
3.         The defendants contested the suit, inter-alia, on the<\/p>\n
ground that the same was not maintainable on the ground of res<\/p>\n
judicata. This led to framing of a preliminary issue which was<\/p>\n
decided in favour of the plaintiff. Thereafter, following issues<\/p>\n
were framed:-\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     “1.   Whether Hari Kishan was the owner of the land
\n           described in para of the plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     2.    Whether the suit land was declared culturable waste
\n           land as alleged in para 3 of the plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     3.    Whether possession of the suit land was taken for
\n           purpose of reclamation as alleged in para 4 of the
\n           plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     4.    Whether    Collector,    Patiala   got   the   suit   land
\n           reclaimed as alleged in para five of the plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     5.    Whether a sum of Rs.13750\/- were paid paid
\n           reclamation charges by the plaintiff alleged in para 7
\n           of the plaintiff? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     6.    Whether Hari Kishan Khosla was served with a
\n           notice to take possession of the land as alleged after
\n           reclamation? If so, its effect? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     7.    Relief?”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 RSA No.305 of 1987                                               3<\/span><\/p>\n
4.          Preliminary issues were decided in favour of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff by order dated 29.4.1981. Thereafter, other issues were<\/p>\n
decided in favour of the plaintiff. It was held that the plaintiff had<\/p>\n
spent the amount in question on reclamation, which was entitled<\/p>\n
to be recovered from the defendants.          This view has been<\/p>\n
affirmed by the Appellate Court.\n<\/p>\n
5.          In the second appeal, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant has proposed to raise following substantial questions<\/p>\n
of law:-\n<\/p>\n
      “1.   Whether the judgment passed by the lower Court are<\/p>\n
            justified in view of the facts that vide judgment Ex.D-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            2 the recovery procedure has been held illegal?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      2.    Whether under Section 70 of the Contract Act claim<\/p>\n
            can be recovered for an illegal Act?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      3.    Whether in view of the findings of judgment Ex.D-2<\/p>\n
            present suit for recovery is maintainable under the<\/p>\n
            Indian Contract Act?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      4.    Whether the judgment delivered by the lower Courts<\/p>\n
            is justified in view of the facts that recovery<\/p>\n
            proceedings under the provision of Pepsu Land<\/p>\n
            Reclamation Act were declared illegal vide judgment<\/p>\n
            dated 30.8.1967 (Ex.D-2)?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5.    Whether the Ld. Courts below were justified in<\/p>\n
            interpreting the provision of the law as well as<\/p>\n
            evidence led by the appellant?”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 RSA No.305 of 1987                                             4<\/span><\/p>\n
6.          In order to go into the proposed questions 1, 3 and<\/p>\n
4, it is necessary to first refer to order dated 29.04.1981 passed<\/p>\n
by the trial Court on the preliminary issue of res judicata. It was<\/p>\n
held that previous suit was for injunction which related to the<\/p>\n
proceedings under the Land Reclamation Act and thus, the<\/p>\n
question raised in the present suit of seeking recovery under<\/p>\n
Section 70 of the Contract Act was not heard and finally<\/p>\n
decided. The lower Appellate Court also dealt with this issue and<\/p>\n
held that even if on a technical point, proceedings under the<\/p>\n
Reclamation Act could not be taken, recovery under Section 70<\/p>\n
of the Act was still permissible as held by the Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court in Mulamchand v. State of M.P. AIR 1968 SC 1218 and<\/p>\n
judgment of this Court dated 7.3.1984 in R.F.A. No.333 of 1972<\/p>\n
The State of Punjab v. Mohinder Singh<\/a> etc.<\/p>\n
7.          Learned counsel for the appellant challenges the<\/p>\n
finding on the question of res judicata.\n<\/p>\n
8.          Learned counsel for the State submits that the same<\/p>\n
issue was examined by this Court in an unreported judgment<\/p>\n
dated 20.5.1983 in Civil Revision No.1911 of 1982 Joginder<\/p>\n
Singh v. The State of Punjab and<\/a> plea of res judicata was<\/p>\n
rejected with the following observations:-<\/p>\n
            “…..In the present suit, the State of Punjab has
\n            based its claim for the recovery of the amount spent
\n            on reclaiming the land of the petitioner under Section
\n            70 of the Contract Act, whether the petitioner is liable
\n RSA No.305 of 1987                                               5<\/span><\/p>\n
            to pay the expenses incurred by the State on
\n            reclaiming his land under Sec.70 of the Contract Act,
\n            was not in issue in the previous suit. In pursuance of
\n            the declaratory decree obtained by the petitioner
\n            against the State of Punjab, the proceedings under
\n            the Pepsu Act for the recovery of the amount in
\n            dispute cannot be initiated. The declaratory decree
\n            obtained by the petitioner cannot debar the State of
\n            Punjab to claim the amount from the petitioner under
\n            Section 70 of the Contract Act. The trial Court
\n            therefore, rightly held that the present suit is not
\n            barred by the rule of resjudicata.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
9.          Reference to the record of the earlier suit shows that<\/p>\n
the defendants in the present case had sought the injunction<\/p>\n
against recovery of costs of reclamation which had given rise to<\/p>\n
following issues:-\n<\/p>\n
      “1.   Whether      the    reclamation       proceedings    and
\n            apportionment of demand of Rs.9751 made by the
\n            Director of Agriculture against the plaintiff are illegal,
\n            ultra vires, null and void, unconstitutional, malafide
\n            and without authority of law for the reasons
\n            mentioned in (a) to (b) of para 5 of the plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      2.    Whether the provisions of the Pepsu Reclamation of
\n            Land Act, 2009 and Rules made thereunder are
\n            illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional for the
\n            reasons given in para 5(b) of the plaint? OPP.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      3.    Whether the suit for injunction is not maintainable for
\n            the reasons mentioned in para 1 of the preliminary
\n            objections? OPD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 RSA No.305 of 1987                                                6<\/span><\/p>\n
      4.    Whether the jurisdiction of the civil court is barred
\n            under the provisions of the Land Reclamation Act
\n            and Land Revenue Act? OPD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5.    Whether the suit is time barred? OPD.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      6.    Relief.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
10.         The earlier suit of the defendants was dismissed by<\/p>\n
the trial Court but was decreed by the lower Appellate Court vide<\/p>\n
judgment dated 30.8.1967 Ex.D-2.\n<\/p>\n
11.         After      referring   to   the   provisions   of   Pepsu<\/p>\n
Reclamation of Land Act, 2009, it was held that the notification<\/p>\n
sought had not been duly published in the official gazette and on<\/p>\n
that account, it was held that the proceedings were void and<\/p>\n
recovery under the provisions of the said Act could not be<\/p>\n
effected.\n<\/p>\n
12.         In Mulamchand (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Curt<\/p>\n
held that Section 70 of the Act could be invoked by a party to<\/p>\n
avoid unjust enrichment to a party for whose benefit person<\/p>\n
seeking to recover the cost of the said benefit had acted. In<\/p>\n
Mohinder Singh (supra), this Court not only followed the<\/p>\n
judgment in Mulamchand (supra), in similar circumstances, but<\/p>\n
also held that decree invalidating the earlier proceedings will not<\/p>\n
be res judicata.\n<\/p>\n
13.         Since the matter is covered by earlier judgments of<\/p>\n
this Court in Mohinder Singh (supra) and Joginder Singh<\/p>\n
(supra), which view finds support from          the judgment of the
\n RSA No.305 of 1987                                      7<\/span><\/p>\n
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mulamchand (supra), none of the<\/p>\n
proposed questions can be held to be substantial question of<\/p>\n
law.\n<\/p>\n
14.       Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.<\/p>\n
November 04, 2009                  (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)\nashwani                                     JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. R.S.A. No.305 of 1987 (O&M) Date of decision: 04.11.2009 Chand Krishan Khosla —–Appellant Vs. State of Punjab & others. —–Respondents CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL 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-51090","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nChand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 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\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-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=\"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-19T16:39:19+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-19T16:39:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1236,\"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\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-19T16:39:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 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":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 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\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-19T16:39:19+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-19T16:39:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009"},"wordCount":1236,"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\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009","name":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-19T16:39:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chand-krishan-khosla-vs-state-of-punjab-others-on-4-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chand Krishan Khosla vs State Of Punjab & Others on 4 November, 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\/51090","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=51090"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/51090\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=51090"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=51090"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=51090"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}