Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: himachal pradesh Year: 1951 Page 2 of about 12 results (0.014 seconds)

Jan 02 1951 (HC)

Jagarnath and ors. Vs. Gayaroo and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-02-1951

Reported in : AIR1951HP51

..... a right of occupancy and did not hold for a fixed term under a contract or a decree or ordec of competent authority. acting under section 45 the revenue officer served the defts. with a notice to vacate the land or contest their liability to ejectment by ..... under which the present suit would fall is that mentioned in clause (d) of the second group under sub-section (8) of section 77, punjab tenancy act, relating to suits by a landlord to prove that a tenant has not a eight of occupancy. it is, however, well established that this clause applies ..... looked into. in the present case the pltfs, have questioned the jurisdiction of the revenue ct. to pass the aforesaid decree under section 46, punjab tenancy act on certain allegations. it is not necessary for me to express any opinion on the merits of those allegations, that is to say, on whether the ..... revenue ct. contesting their liability to be ejected. the revenue ct. declared the defts. to be occupancy tenants of the land under section 8 of the act and ordered restoration of possession of the land to them, and its decision was maintained up to the highest revenue appellate ct.4. having failed in the ..... filed a criminal complaint against the pltfs. which was unsuccessful. thereafter the pltfs. filed an appln. to the revenue officer under section 43 of the said act for service on the defts. of a notice of ejectment on the ground mentioned in clause (b) of section 42, namely that the defts. had not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 29 1951 (HC)

Lal Chand Vs. the Collector of Sirmur and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-29-1951

Reported in : AIR1952HP16

..... specially in view of the terms of his notice under section 80, civil p c.; that the petitioner having been found guilty of breach of contract as a result of departmental enquiry, it was not open to him to claim the summary remedy by way of a writ; that the petitioner ..... and bearing of expenses of extraction, collection and delivery of resin at the factory by the government of the state. the contract was initially for a period of one year but subject to extension thereafter. there is a difference between the parties as to whether it was ..... department of the ex-nahan state. on 10th, poh, samvat 2004, corresponding to 24-12-1947, the state and the petitioner entered into a contract whereunder the latter was to extract resin and supply the same at a factory on certain terms and conditions, including receipt of commission by the petitioner ..... and ultra vires since the amount claimed does not fall within the purview of section 82 of the forest act.3. the respondents traversed the above allegations, and they pleaded that breach of contract had emanated from the petitioner and, as a result, a sum of rs. 200/10/3 was still ..... adjective 'ministerial' as 'concerned with the execution of law.' the respondents, who were concerned merely with the execution of the precept under section 82, forest act, received from the chief conservator of forests, were therefore nothing but 'minis-terial officers' within the intendment of the above quotation from halsbury. again, it was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //