Man caught trying to steal
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, April 30 — Daljit Singh of Sector 19 was caught red-handed while allegedly trying to steal the purse of an employee of the Estate Office in Sector 17. The purse contained more than Rs 1,030. A case under Sections 379 and 411 of the IPC has been registered against Daljit.

Eve-teasing: Two youths from Mani Majra were arrested by the police for allegedly indulging in eve-teasing outside the Government School, Sector 8. The two, Devinder Singh and Satpal Singh, were nabbed and booked under Section 294 of the IPC.

DERA BASSI

Scooterist killed: A scooterist died on the spot while the pillion-rider was seriously injured when a truck hit them near the local bus stand here yesterday.

According to sources, Ajmer Singh died on the spot while Gulshan Kumar was rushed to the Government Medical College and Hospital Sector 32 in a critical condition. The duo, residents of Devinagar village, were riding scooter number CH-01-G-2019 when they were hit by truck number HNG-6497.

Two arrested: The local police has arrested Gurmukh Singh and Vinod Kumar of Karnal for smuggling 120 boxes of liquor on Thursday.

In a press note issued by Mr Param Pal Singh Sidhu, SSP, Patiala, the duo were arrested during a nakaa on the national highway. A team of police personnel, headed by Mr Jassa Singh (SHO, Dera Bassi), arrested the suspects on the directions of Mr H.S. Bhullar, Deputy Superintendent of Police. The police has impounded the vehicle (Swaraj Mazda number HR-05-1497) used to carry the liquor. A case under Sections 61-1-14 of the Excise Act has been registered against the suspects.

Order on phone bills set aside
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, April 30 — The Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, UT, comprising its President, Mr J.B. Garg, and members, Col P.K. Vasudeva and Mrs Devinder Jit Dhatt, has set aside an order of the District Forum-II quashing the four telephone bills on the ground of being excessive.

Earlier, in the complaint filed before the forum, the complainant, Haryana State Cooperative Apex Bank Ltd., had contended that telephone No 534623 was installed at the residence of its managing mirector and the department had issued excessive and inflated bills. The bill relating to March, 1993, was for Rs 38,016, May, 1993, for Rs 52,333, July, 1993, for Rs 72,100 and September, 1993, it was for Rs 53,609.

The District Forum-II had directed the department to revise these bills on the basis of the earliest highest bill for Rs 25,514 and thereby reduce the amounts of all the four bills.

In the appeal before the commission, the Telecommunications Department contended that the telephone had the STD/ISD facility along with dynamic locking system, which ruled out the possibility of any misuse. It contended that the bills were issued on the basis of actual consumption and the allegtion of misuse of telephone or defect in the instrument or tempering with the meter had no merit. Further no specific defect had been described in the metering equipment nor was there any evidence to show the defect in the metering system or about the probable misuser.

After going through the records, the commission held that extensive use of telephone could not be ruled out. It further found that the complainant had withheld the details of the calls for the period. On the contrary, the department had placed on record the print out of the telephone bills which showed that there had been numerous STD/ISD calls.

It, therefore, held that it was not a fit case to order any reduction in the bills. The commission set aside the order of the forum and also dismissed the cross appeal filed by the complainant.

Order to finance firm

The District Forum-I has directed Onida Finance Ltd to pay the maturity amount of non-convertible debentures along with interests and compensation of Rs 1,000.

The complainant, Mr Brij Bhushan Mittal, had contended that he had deposited Rs 12,000 under the fixed deposit scheme and Rs 10,000 under the non-convertible debenture scheme of the company. The maturity amount of the fixed deposit of Rs 14,347 was payable on May 14, 1998. However, it was received after a delay of 70 days on July 3, 1998. The amount due under the non-convertible debenture scheme payable on April 29, 1998, had also not been paid by the company.

The forum had issued notice to the company but as nobody appeared on its behalf it was proceeded against ex parte.

After going through the records, the forum Bench comprising Dr H.C. Modi and members, Dr R.K. Behl and Ms Shashi Kanta, has directed the company to pay delayed interest of Rs 536 towards the fixed deposit repayment and pay interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum on the maturity amount of non-convertible debentures with effect from April 29, 1998, along with a compensation of Rs 1,000 to the complainant.

Prices of liquor vary
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, April 30—Liquor lovers may be amused to know that there is a big difference in the prices of different varieties in the city, and its satellite towns such as S.A.S. Nagar and Panchkula.

During a survey by the TNS today, it was found that the difference was common in case of all premium, economy and cheap range of liquor. The wide difference in the price could be judged from the fact that if a bottle of 'Black Dog', a premium brand, was priced at Rs 1100 in Panchkula, it could be purchased in Chandigarh and S.A.S. Nagar for Rs 1500.

Similarly, if one could buy a bottle of 'Single Malt', another premium whisky, for Rs 350 in Panchkula it was priced at Rs 500 and Rs 450 in Chandigarh and S.A.S.Nagar, respectively. The same was the case with another premium brand, 'Forester', which was priced at Rs 750 and Rs 900 in Panchkula and Chandigarh and S.A.S.Nagar, respectively. The same was the case with a bottle of 'Royal Challenge', which was priced at Rs 250 in Panchkula and was available in Chandigarh and S.A.S. nagar for Rs 300. 'Malibu', the coconut rum, was priced at Rs 300 in all the three cities.

The difference of price was also noticeable as far as prices of different 'economy' brands were concerned. A bottle of 'McDowell No 1' could be purchased for Rs 110 in Panchkula and for Rs 150 in Chandigarh and S.A.S. Nagar. Similarly, a bottle of 'Aristocrat Premium', which was available for Rs 110 at a liquor shop in Panchkula, was priced at Rs 150 in Chandigarh and S.A.S. nagar.

A bottle of 'Blue Ribond" gin was priced at Rs 90 at a liquor shop in Panchkula and the same was being sold in Chandigarh and S.A.S. nagar for Rs 150 and Rs 120, respectively. A bottle of 'Aristocrat' was available for Rs 80 in Panchkula and it was priced at Rs 120 and Rs 130 in Chandigarh and S.A.S. Nagar, the cities where there was little difference of prices as far as liquor was concerned.

If one could buy a bottle of 'Diplomat' and 'Bagpiper' by paying Rs 80 in Panchkula, it could be fetched in Chandigarh and S.A.S. Nagar for Rs 120. Similarly, a bottle of 'Green Label' whisky priced at Rs 90 in Panchkula, was available for Rs 130 in the two other cities.

There was, however, no difference in the prices of light and strong been which was available for Rs 25 and Rs 30 in all the three cities.

Though the exact reason for the difference in prices in all the three cities could not be ascertained, the sources attributed it to acquiring of liquor vends by individuals instead of a syndicate, which had been controlling the prices of liquor in the past.

Liquor vends' auction upheld
Tribune News Service

CHANDIGARH, April 30 — The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the auction of liquor vends of Kundli group in Sonepat district held on March 18.

Mr Justice G.C. Garg and Mr Justice V.M. Jain, who handed down this order, held that the petition filed by Neel Kanth and Company challenging the auction of liquor vends "has no merit and is dismissed in limine but with no order as to costs. The video cassette produced in this court marked as "A" is taken in record and is ordered to be preserved for one year, unless otherwise ordered by the apex court in appeal or Special Leave Petition taken against this order."

The auction was contested by Neel Kanth and Co. on the ground that the presiding officer accepted the bid of Rs 12.25 crore offered by Bhagirath Lal and Co. and ignored his bid of Rs 12.26 crore.

The petitioner further submitted that as per the policy of the government, the presiding officer could have demanded one-third of the total bid amount in cash or bank draft on the spot at the time of auction in case the bid exceeded 35 per cent of the reserve price. The reserve price for the Kundli group was fixed at Rs 9.90 crore. A 35 per cent increase came to Rs 13,36,50,000 at which amount the condition of one-third cash could have been imposed. But the presiding officer favoured Bhagirath Lal and Co. imposed the said condition after the bid of Rs 12.25 crore offered by Bhagirath Lal and Co. and ignored the petition's bid of Rs 12.26 crore.

Stay on trust dissolution

The High Court today stayed the dissolution of Baba Zorawar Singh and Baba Fateh Singh Public School Trust.

Mr Justice V.K. Bali and Mr Justice A.S. Garg, who constituted the Bench, also directed that this petition would be heard with earlier petitions. They issued notice to the S.G.P.C. and the Punjab Government for July 20.

The petition was filed by Col Shamsher Singh, one of the Trustees, questioning the letter that the SGPC Secretary had written informing the school principal that the trust had been dissolved.

The letter that the S.G.P.C. Secretary had written said in future all types of managements of the trust would be carried out in accordance with the instructions to be issued by the S.G.P.C.

Notice to SSP on contempt plea

Mr Justice N.K. Sodhi today issued notice to Mr Gurdev Singh Sahota, Mr Chaman Lal, Mr Harbhajan Singh Gill, S.S.P.. D.S.P. and Inspector of the CIA staff of Amritsar, respectively, apart from two ASIs for July 29 on a contempt petition filed by Mr Sat Pal Singh, a resident of Amritsar district.

The petitioner stated that with a view to safeguarding him from illegal and repeated arrests, Mr Justice N.K. Kapur had directed the S.S.P. that if any case was registered against him at any time in future, he "shall give notice to him and shall not arrest the petitioner for one week."

He maintained that although the respondents knew the order as copies had been supplied to the police, on April 16 they picked him up from his house without registering any F.I.R. The police had raided his house without any ground for arrest. A police party that went to his house simply asked him to accompany it to the police station. When he refused, he was beaten up. His wife was also abused when she informed the police about the High Court order.

He further alleged that he was taken away by the CIA staff, bashed up for two or three days and asked to pay Rs 25,000.