Every day, court rooms across India decide cases that quietly affect ordinary people, families and businesses — not just lawyers. This short digest picks out a few developments from the last day or two, explained in plain language, so you know what’s changing and whether it touches your own situation. Today’s roundup covers a local Punjab recruitment matter and two Supreme Court rulings with everyday relevance for borrowers, businesses and consumers.
Punjab & Haryana High Court Halts Pharmacy Officer Recruitment Amid Cheating Row
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has put the recruitment of 454 Pharmacy Officers in Punjab on hold after candidates challenged the process conducted by Baba Farid University of Health Sciences. The petitioners say the written exam was compromised by an organised, inter-state cheating racket — Punjab Police had earlier busted a network that reportedly charged candidates between ₹3.5 lakh and ₹13 lakh to guarantee passing marks, seizing wireless cheating devices in the process. The Court has ordered that the appointment process stay frozen until the next hearing, fixed for 17 September.
For the hundreds of candidates who appeared honestly, this means a longer wait before appointments are finalised — but it’s a reminder that Indian courts do intervene quickly when a selection process is credibly alleged to be rigged. Anyone facing a similar situation with a public recruitment exam has a real legal remedy through a writ petition.
Source: The Tribune
Supreme Court: Filing a Winding-Up Petition Doesn’t Stop the Clock on Your Recovery Suit
In Mageba Bridge Products Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Trade Centre, the Supreme Court held that if a company pursues winding-up proceedings against a debtor and later also wants to file a separate civil suit to recover the same money, the time spent in the winding-up case cannot be excluded while calculating the limitation period for the recovery suit. The Court explained that winding-up and a money recovery suit are two different remedies seeking different relief, so one doesn’t pause the clock on the other.
In practice, this matters for any business owed money by a company that has gone into winding-up: waiting for that process to conclude before also filing a civil suit could mean losing your right to recover the money at all. If you’re weighing options after a dispute over unpaid dues, it’s worth getting advice early rather than assuming one proceeding protects your position in the other — our civil litigation team can help you map out the right sequence of steps.
Source: LiveLaw
Supreme Court: Banks Can Recover Interest Piled Up After a Loan Turns Bad
In Punjab National Bank v. M/s Shree Jyoti Education and Management Trust World, the Supreme Court restored a bank’s right to recover interest that had accumulated in a “suspense account” after a borrower’s loan was classified as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA). An Orissa High Court order had earlier reduced the borrower’s outstanding liability by relying only on a balance certificate, without accounting for this suspense-account interest. The Supreme Court set that aside, holding that such interest remains a valid part of the recoverable “debt” and restored the bank’s claim of roughly ₹54.9 lakh with further interest.
The takeaway for anyone with a defaulted or restructured loan is that the total amount a bank can legally claim may be higher than what appears on a simple balance certificate once accumulated interest is factored in — an important point to check carefully before agreeing to any settlement figure. Our banking & financial litigation team regularly advises clients on exactly this kind of dispute.
Source: LiveLaw
Consumer Forum in Gurugram: Charging Extra for a Carry Bag Can Cost You More
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in Gurugram has held footwear retailer Red Tape liable for unfair trade practice and deficiency in service after a customer was charged ₹30 for three carry bags along with his purchase. The Commission found the practice of billing separately for bags — without the customer’s clear consent — amounts to an unfair trade practice under consumer law. This follows a similar order earlier this year from a Rohtak consumer commission, where the same company was directed to refund the bag charge and pay ₹8,000 in compensation and costs.
Small charges like this rarely feel worth fighting over, but consumer commissions across Punjab and Haryana have shown they take these complaints seriously, and the compensation awarded is often well out of proportion to the original amount in dispute. If a shop, service provider or company has treated you unfairly, our consumer disputes team can advise on whether a complaint is worth filing.
Source: LiveLaw
If any of today’s developments touch a situation you’re dealing with — a recruitment dispute, a loan recovery notice, or an unfair charge — feel free to get in touch with our office in Patiala for advice specific to your case.
This digest is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Advocate Sukhdeep Singh Khaira & Associates, Patiala.