{"id":60364,"date":"2008-10-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-07-01T22:57:57","modified_gmt":"2017-07-01T17:27:57","slug":"ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008<\/div>\n
Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                        1\n\n\n\n\n     In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.\n\n\n          Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)\n\n                    Date of Decision: 15.10.2008\n\n\n\nM\/s Surinder & Company\n                                                           ...Appellant\n                               Versus\nState of Haryana and Others\n                                                       ...Respondents\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.\n\n\nPresent: Mr. Mohan Jain, Senior Advocate\n         with Mr. Vikram Jain, Advocate\n         for the appellant.\n\n\nKanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)\n<\/pre>\n
         The present appeal has been filed by M\/s Surinder &<\/p>\n
Company aggrieved against the judgments & decrees passed by two<\/p>\n
Courts below.\n<\/p>\n
         Appellant-plaintiff had instituted a suit with a prayer of<\/p>\n
permanent (prohibitory and mandatory) injunction to     the effect that<\/p>\n
State of Haryana, Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, Deputy<\/p>\n
Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Hisar, and Excise & Taxation Officer,<\/p>\n
Hisar with the powers of the Assistant Collector, Hisar, respondents-<\/p>\n
defendants, be restrained from recovering or cause to recover any<\/p>\n
amount from the plaintiff-appellant by resorting to coercive methods. A<\/p>\n
further prayer for mandatory injunction was made that the defendants be
\n Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                              2<\/span><\/p>\n
ordered to refund the amount of 5% of bid money deposited by<\/p>\n
appellant-plaintiff.\n<\/p>\n
           The facts which can be gathered from the judgments of<\/p>\n
learned two Courts below are that on 8.3.1991 auction of L2 Vends of<\/p>\n
various groups including L2 Hansi Group was conducted at Hisar. It has<\/p>\n
been averred      that it was the duty of the officer holding auction to<\/p>\n
demand immediate deposit equivalent to 1\/3rd share of the whole<\/p>\n
amount of bid by the successive and higher bidder. As per Excise Policy<\/p>\n
prevailing in the year 1991-92, bid was subject to sanction and the<\/p>\n
approval of the Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Hisar, within ten days<\/p>\n
from the date of auction. It is stated that plaintiff being higher and<\/p>\n
successful bidder, deposited Rs.6,61,000\/- as 5% of bid money but the<\/p>\n
remaining amount i.e. 1\/3rd of the bid could not be deposited as the<\/p>\n
atmosphere at the time of auction was not congenial. A further case of<\/p>\n
the plaintiff was that as the bid was excessive and very high due to<\/p>\n
illegality and irregularity committed by the officer holding auction,<\/p>\n
therefore, bid was withdrawn by the plaintiff on 13.3.1991. A letter under<\/p>\n
a postal certificate to this effect was posted on 13.3.1991. It was further<\/p>\n
stated that      since the bid was not accepted by the Financial<\/p>\n
Commissioner as per condition No.2 of the Excise Policy for the year<\/p>\n
1991-92, therefore, plaintiff was well within his rights to withdraw the bid.<\/p>\n
Therefore, various notices issued by the defendants for recovery of the<\/p>\n
deficiency of the license fee due to alleged re-sale are not in<\/p>\n
consonance with law.\n<\/p>\n
           Notice of the suit was given to the defendants who filed written<\/p>\n
statement controverting the facts stated in the plaint and also raised
\n Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                          3<\/span><\/p>\n
preliminary objections. After the pleadings of the parties had concluded,<\/p>\n
following issues have been framed by learned trial Court:-<\/p>\n
          1.       Whether the order dated 25.03.91 and notice dated<\/p>\n
                   10.04.91 issued by defendants are illegal, void and<\/p>\n
                   not binding upon the rights of the plaintiff       as<\/p>\n
                   alleged? OPP<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          2.       Whether Civil Court has no jurisdiction? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          3.       Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          4.       Whether the suit is pre-mature, if no its effect? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          5.       Whether the suit is bad for want of notice u\/s 80<\/p>\n
                   CPC? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          6.       Whether the plaintiff is estopped from filing the<\/p>\n
                   present suit by his own act and conduct? OPD.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          7.       Relief.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          The plaintiff examined Ram Singh as PW.1 and placed<\/p>\n
reliance upon documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. The defendants examined<\/p>\n
Surinder Kumar, Excise Inspector and relied upon documents Ex.D1 to<\/p>\n
Ex.D6.\n<\/p>\n
          Contention of the plaintiff that the contract stood revoked by<\/p>\n
posting the letter dated 13.3.1991 was not accepted by learned trial<\/p>\n
Court. Learned trial Court relied upon the testimony of Surinder Singh<\/p>\n
DW.1, Excise Inspector, to hold that the letter never reached to the<\/p>\n
Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, and further his deposition<\/p>\n
on oath dated 24.7.2008 was noticed wherein he stated that the letter<\/p>\n
regarding withdrawal is not in their possession till today. However, on<\/p>\n
issue No.5, taking into consideration the fact that exemption in serving
\n Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
prior notice upon the defendants under Section 80 CPC had been<\/p>\n
granted by the Court, therefore, issue No.5 was decided in favour of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and other issues were decided against the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
          Learned Appellate Court below after analyzing the entire<\/p>\n
evidence, returned the following findings and dismissed the appeal:-<\/p>\n
                    “15.       Thus, the perusal of this Clause makes it<\/p>\n
                    clear that the bid has been accepted at a fall of the<\/p>\n
                    hammer and the bid of the plaintiff was accepted. It<\/p>\n
                    was     only   the    prerogative      of    the    Financial<\/p>\n
                    Commissioner to reject it. Meaning thereby the<\/p>\n
                    contract between the plaintiff and the Govt. was<\/p>\n
                    complete and he was left with no chace so as to<\/p>\n
                    withdraw the offer. Even if for argument sake, it can<\/p>\n
                    be taken that the offer could have been withdrawn till<\/p>\n
                    after    communication        from          the     Financial<\/p>\n
                    Commissioner         not   rejecting        the    bid   was<\/p>\n
                    communicated to the plaintiff, there is no sufficient<\/p>\n
                    evidence to show that the bid was successfully<\/p>\n
                    withdrawn by the plaintiff. DW.1 has refuted by<\/p>\n
                    saying that the withdrawal of the contract was never<\/p>\n
                    received in the office of the Financial Commissioner.<\/p>\n
                    Apart from that the offer of the bid was accepted by<\/p>\n
                    District Excise and Taxation Commissioner so if any<\/p>\n
                    revocation was to be communicated, then the same<\/p>\n
                    ought to have been communicated to the District<\/p>\n
                    Excise and      Taxation    Commissioner who has
\n Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                             5<\/span><\/p>\n
                    accepted the bid of the plaintiff. Thus, by taking from<\/p>\n
                    any angle, it cannot be said that the contract was<\/p>\n
                    not complete”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          I have heard Mr. Mohan Jain, learned senior Advocate,<\/p>\n
assisted by Mr. Vikram Jain, Advocate, on behalf of the plaintiff. He has<\/p>\n
stated that the substantial question of law which this Court is required to<\/p>\n
examine is “whether withdrawal of the offer before acceptance shall<\/p>\n
terminate the contract or not?”\n<\/p>\n
          This Court need not go into this question as there is<\/p>\n
concurrent finding of fact by the two Courts below that the letter of<\/p>\n
withdrawal had not reached the Authorities, therefore, the acceptance is<\/p>\n
binding. It is the case of the plaintiff that the letter withdrawing the bid<\/p>\n
was posted on 13.3.1991, whereas letter of acceptance had been<\/p>\n
issued on 15.3.1991. Therefore, it could not be assumed that the letter<\/p>\n
had reached before communication of acceptance was issued. Reliance<\/p>\n
has been placed by learned counsel on Union of India & Others v.<\/p>\n
M\/s Bhimsen Walaiti Ram AIR<\/a> 1971 Supreme Court 2295 to say that<\/p>\n
final bid which is subject to confirmation can be withdrawn. To fortify<\/p>\n
this, further reliance has been placed upon The State of Madhya<\/p>\n
Pradesh v. Hakim Singh and Another AIR<\/a> 1973 Madhya Pradesh 24<\/p>\n
wherein it has been held that the contract is is not complete till<\/p>\n
confirmation and a bidder can withdraw before the confirmation. These<\/p>\n
judgments can be of no help to the petitioner as they depend upon a<\/p>\n
question of fact “whether letter of withdrawal had reached the Authorities<\/p>\n
who had to grant the approval?”\n<\/p>\n
          Learned counsel further relied upon Om Parkash Bahal v.
\n Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M)                           6<\/span><\/p>\n
A.K.Shroff AIR 1973 Delhi 39 to contend that mere postage should be<\/p>\n
considered as presumption in favour of the appellant that the letter of<\/p>\n
withdrawal had reached the Authorities.\n<\/p>\n
          A letter posted on 13.3.1991 has to take sufficient time to<\/p>\n
reach before the concerned quarters. In the present case, on a decision<\/p>\n
taken by the Financial Commissioner, a communication had been<\/p>\n
issued on 15.3.1991 which is less than 48 hours, which is a fact which<\/p>\n
has not been accepted by both the Courts below. Therefore, no<\/p>\n
substantial question of law arise. There is no merit in the present appeal<\/p>\n
and hence, same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                           (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia)
\n                                                                Judge
\nOctober 15, 2008
\n“DK”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Regular Second Appeal No. 1788 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.10.2008 M\/s Surinder & Company …Appellant Versus State […]<\/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-60364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - 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\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-01T17:27:57+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-01T17:27:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1276,\"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\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-01T17:27:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - 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\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-01T17:27:57+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-01T17:27:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008"},"wordCount":1276,"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\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008","name":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-01T17:27:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-surinder-company-vs-state-of-haryana-and-others-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S Surinder & Company vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 October, 2008"}]},{"@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\/60364","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=60364"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60364\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}