Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: himachal pradesh Year: 1959 Page 1 of about 5 results (0.014 seconds)

Jul 16 1959 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Sansar Chand and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-16-1959

Reported in : AIR1960HP1

..... fold : in the first place, he submitted--& in my opinion with considerable justification--that the court below has wrongly assumed that the provisions of the indian contract! act were in force in chamba district at the relevant time. he pointed out that the surety bonds were executed by respondents 3 to 6 on 29th bai- ..... ) and paulo varghese v. ittine abraham, air 1952 trav-co. 202 were both decisions under section 126 and 127 of the indian contact act. if the provisions of the contract act were not in force in chamba at the relevant time, it follows that the ratio decidendi of these rulings could not apply to the present ..... , ex. d.w. 31/b, was completed on 12th har, 2005 b. (corresponding to 25-6-1948 a.d.). the provisions of the indian contract act were applied to himachal pradesh, including the chamba district, by the himachal pradesh (application of laws) order, 1948, dated 25-12-1948 and by the merged (states ..... , which came into force on 1-1-1950. it has not been shown that prior to merger any legislation parallel to the indian contract act was in force in chamba state. this all imporant point has been overlooked by the court below. the rulings, reported in nanak ram v. ..... out a case of impossibility of performance, it has to be shown that the contract could not be performed, by the reason of anything that the government did in the matter. under section 56 of the indian contract act, if a contract becomes impossible or by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 1959 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Kedareshwar

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-30-1959

Reported in : AIR1959HP32

..... compensation. the district judge has rightly pointed out--vide air 1924 pc 216--that the right to enforce such an assurance remained only with the high contracting parties. i, therefore, accept the finding of the district judge on this issue.5. (b) the next question that was argued before me ..... retirement of public servants.i am unable to accept the argument, advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, that since judicial and official acts are presumed to have been regularly performed, there must have been a delegation of such power by the chief commissioner in favour of the deputy ..... provided that all the laws in force in himachal pradesh before the appointed dale 1-8-1949 including orders made under the extra-provincial jurisdiction act would continue in force until repealed, modified or amended by the dominion legislature or any other competent authority. it, therefore, comes to this ..... provinces either by treaty, agreement, grant, usage, sufferance or other lawful means. it was, under sections 3 and 4 of the extra-provincial jurisdiction act, 1947, that the central government issued the himachal pradesh (administration) order on 15-4-1948, providing, inter alia, for the appointment of a chief ..... were subject only to the paramountcy of the british crown. with the advent of independence on 15-8-1947, paramountcy lapsed. the government of india act, 1935, was not made applicable to these states on the day of independence 15-8-1947. the rulers of these states, however, entered .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1959 (HC)

Mt. Padma Vs. Parma Ram

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : May-06-1959

Reported in : AIR1959HP37

ordermisc. first appeal no. 22 of 59.14. i allow this appeal, set aside the decision of the trial court and grant mt. padma a decree for judicial separations against parma ram under section 10(1)(b) of the hindu marriage act, 1955. she will get her costs, here and in the court below, from the respondent misc. first appeal no. 23 of 59.15. i allow this appeal and set aside the decree for restitution of conjugal rights granted by the trial court, i. e., parma ram's petition under section 9(1) of the act is dismissed. the appellant will get her costs here, and in the court below, from the respondent.16. this judgment will be read in both theappeals, i. e., misc. first appeals 22 and 23 of 1959.appeals allowed.

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1959 (HC)

Bhupendra Nath Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : May-21-1959

Reported in : AIR1959HP29,1959CriLJ1165

..... supreme court case anything which goes against the view expressed by me about the validity of the impugned provision of s. 73 of the evidence act, or the legality of the order of the learned sessions judge directing the accused, if he had really done so to furnish specimen-writing'. the ..... air 1957 madh-pra 73 and other indian and foreign cases, held: 'an order directing an accused to furnish his specimen writing under section 73, evidence act, is not hit by the provisions of article 20, clause (3) of the constitution. the accused cannot, therefore, refuse to give the specimen writing when ..... customs v. calcutta motor and cycle co., air 1958 cal 682. there, the facts were that notices under section 171-a of the sea customs act had been issued to certain persons to appear before some customs officials and to produce certain documents. it appeared that the persons to whom notices were ..... there, the facts were: 'in the course of the investigation of an offence alleged to have been committed by the accused under section 29, telegraph act, the police took out an application alleged to have been written by the accused from the file of one of the cases pending before the municipal ..... order directing an accused person to furnish his finger impressions for the purpose of comparison with certain disputed similar impressions under section 73 of the evidence act or otherwise, would be contrary to the provisions of article 20(3) of the constitution. for reasons to be stated shortly, i have come .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1959 (HC)

K.C. Mehra Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-07-1959

Reported in : AIR1960HP20

order8. i allow this appeal to this extent that the order of the court below is set aside in so far as it purports to pass a decree in terms of the awards relating to agreements nos. 8 and 9. i make it clear that the awards arising out of agreements 8 and 9 have not been set aside by me. that would be a matter to be considered by a court of competent jurisdiction, if and when duly moved in that behalf-the application under section 14(2) of the arbitration act dated 21-9-1954 filed by the government advocate himachal pradesh in the court of the senior subordinate judge, mahasu, will be returned to him, (i.e. government advocate).9. since this is the first case of its kind thathas come up to this court, i direct that parties willbear their respective costs here, and in the courtbelow.

Tag this Judgment!

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