M/S Kush Enterpises vs Haryana State Co-Operative Supply And ...

Punjab-Haryana High Court

M/S Kush Enterpises vs Haryana State Co-Operative Supply And ... on 23 April, 2024

                                                                                                2024:PHHC:055064
              205
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                                  AT CHANDIGARH
                                                             CWP-15641-2022
                                                             Date of Decision: 23.04.2024

              M/S KUSH ENTERPISES                                                          ...Petitioner

                                       Versus
              HARYANA STATE CO-OPERATIVE SUPPLY AND MARKETING
              FEDERATION ( HAFED) AND ORS            ...Respondents

              CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
              Present:-                Mr. Pardeep Kumar Sehrawat, Advocate for
                                       Mr. Vivek Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                       Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. AG, Haryana.

                                       Mr. Udit Garg, Advocate
                                       for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

                                       Mr. Sourabh Singh, Advocate for
                                       Mr. Sehej Sandhawalia, Advocate
                                       for respondent Nos.4 to 6.
                                              *****

              JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to release the security as well as clear pending bills with respect to Custom Milling Season in 2020-2021.

2. On 08.02.2024, the following order was passed:

"The petitioner is seeking release of its FDR as well as milling charges. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 in its reply has pointed out that petitioner has not returned 29823 bags and 1395 wooden crates. It has been further pointed out that one of the partner of the petitioner firm is a surety in another firm which has defaulted, thus, partner of the petitioner firm is responsible for the dues of defaulter firm. Faced with this learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to get instructions.

authenticity of this order/judgment.

Adjourned to 23.04.2024."

3. Mr. Pardeep Kumar Sehrawat, Advocate submits that petitioner would return afore-stated bags and wooden crates within four weeks from today.

4. Mr. Udit Garg, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 assures the Court that as soon as petitioner would return afore-stated bags and wooden crates, petitioner's claim would be settled in accordance with law.

5. In the wake of statement of counsel for the parties, the present petition stands disposed of.

6. It is made clear that respondents would process bills of petitioner within three months from the date of return of afore-stated articles.

                                                                           (JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
              23.04.2024                                                        JUDGE
              himanshu

                                       Whether speaking/reasoned                   Yes/No
                                       Whether reportable                          Yes/No




HIMANSHU
2024.04.23 16:56
I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this order/judgment.