Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract act 1872 Court: himachal pradesh Year: 1966 Page 1 of about 6 results (0.074 seconds)

Jun 01 1966 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Rajkumar Rajinder Singh and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-01-1966

Reported in : AIR1967HP1

..... of himachal pradesh. items nos. 1 and 10 of that part show that the secretary (forests), who is admittedly the head of the forests department, was competent to execute the contract of appointing counsel, on behalf of the central government. the appointment of shri prithvi raj advocate on behalf of the central government, by the secretary (forests), was a valid one ..... may direct or authorise. the president has, by government of india, ministry of law, notification no. g. s. r. 1161 dated the 1st december, 1958, authorised certain officers to execute contracts, referred to in article 299, on his behalf, with respect to the ministries of the central government and union territories. part xxv a of the notification relates to the union ..... shall be expressed to be made by the president and all such contracts shall be executed on behalf of the president by such person and in such manner ..... the central government in connection with the administration ofhimachal pradesh. all contracts, in connection with the administration of a union territory, are contracts made in the exercise of the executive power of the union, vide section 55 (a), the government of union territories act. article 299 of the constitution provides that all contracts made in the exercise of the executive power of the union .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 28 1966 (HC)

Mohan Lal Vs. Mohun Ram

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Feb-28-1966

Reported in : AIR1966HP61

..... ) and (2) of section 11 are as under:'(1) notwithstanding any law, custom or contract to the contrary a tenant other than a sub-tenant shall, on application made to the compensation officer at any time after the commencement of this ..... .25. the appellant resided with his fatherand, was being maintained by him. the legalright of the appellant under section 20, hindu adoptions and maintenance act may, therefore, be taken into account, while determining his means,the father of the appellant had appeared as awitness. he had admitted that he had ..... circumstances. tangible property will no doubt constitute resources of the minor. but the statutory right of the minor, under section 20 hindu adoptions and maintenance act, to be maintained by the father, cannot, invariably, be regarded as the means of the minor. it is not difficult to visualize a case ..... property other than the land in dispute, he had no other means of livelihood.22. the word 'means' has not been defined in the abolition act or, perhaps, in any other enactment. the dictionary meaning of the word 'means' is 'resources', vide webster's new international dictionary, there can ..... acquire proprietary rights.19. the next question is whether the appellant was entitled to the protection of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the abolition act and the respondent could not be granted proprietary rights, under sub-section (1) of the above section, during the minority of the appellant. subsections (1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 15 1966 (HC)

Sohan Lall Vs. Smt. Dharampati

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-15-1966

Reported in : AIR1967HP38

1. this appeal is directed against an order of the learned senior subordinate judge, mahasu. whereby he dismissed a petition of the appellant, under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, seeking divorce from the respondent, his wife, on the ground that the respondent was living in adultery. the petition, which was filed on the 24th november, 1964, was based on ..... living an adulterous course of life. now, the child was born to the respondent during the continuance of the valid marriage between her and the appellant. under section 112, evidence act, there was a conclusive presumption that the child was the offspring of the appellant unless it could be shown that the appellant and the respondent had no access to each ..... the respondent had never lived with the appellant at simla.13. the fact remained that the appellant had railed to prove non-access. the presumption, raised by section 112 evidence act, that the child was born of the appellant remained unrebutted. it was to be held that the child was the offspring of the appellant and not of any other person .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1966 (HC)

Jai Sukh and ors. Vs. Manohar Das

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-04-1966

Reported in : AIR1967HP15

..... or limits the operation of the general rule of law that a proprietor whose rights are not controlled or limited expressly or impliedly by statute law, by grant, or by contract, has an exclusive right to the use or enjoyment of his land for all purposes not injurious to the rights of his neighbours, should be put to strict proof of ..... , of the respondent, in july 1959; that the respondent had served a notice on the petitioners to refrain from passing over the land but they had persisted in their illegal acts. the respondent prayed that the petitioners be restrained, by the issue of a perpetual injunction, from passing over, and using, the land for carrying the produce of their orchard or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 1966 (HC)

Shyam Chand Vs. Smt. Janki

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-04-1966

Reported in : AIR1966HP70,1966CriLJ1438

..... urged, on behalf of the appellant, that the documents ex. dw-6/a to ex. dw-6/e were not relevant and admissible in proceedings under section 10, hindu marriage act. the argument was that the aforesaid documents were copies of proceedings and orders, arising out of applications, under section 488, cr. p. c., and were not relevant and admissible ..... expression 'desertion' was interpreted by their lordships of the supreme court in lachman utamchand kirpalani v. meena, air 1964 sc 40, a case under section 10(1) (a), hindu marriage act. their lordships adopted the interpretation, put on the expression 'desertion', in bipinchandra jaisinghbai shah v. prabhavati, (s) air 1957 sc 176. in the latter case, it was observed:-- 'for ..... senior subordinate judge was right in holding that the appellant had failed to prove that the respondent had deseuted him within the meaning of section 10 (1) (a), hindu marriage act. the expression 'desertion' has been defined in the explanation to section 10 (1). this explanation reads:-- 'in this section, the expression 'desertion' with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means ..... 1. this appeal, against a decree of the learned senior subordinate judge mahasu, has arisen out of a petition, filed by the appellant, under section 10 (1) (a), hindu marriage act, against the respondent, his wife. the petition was based on the following allegations :- the appellant and the respondent were married in june 1951 at village bedar, tehsil theog. the parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1966 (HC)

Himachal Transport Workers Union (Regd.) and ors. Vs. Secretary (Trans ...

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-25-1966

Reported in : AIR1967HP21

..... a result of the implementation of the modification. it was explained that petitioner no. 2 had been employed on daily wages and his services were terminated in accordance with the contract of his service for reasons wholly unconnected with the implementation of the modification. there is nothing on the record to show that the termination of the services of petitioner no ..... locus standi, they have no right to challenge the vires of the modification on any ground, including the ground that it contravenes the provisions of chapter iv-a of the act.13. the fundamental rights of the petitioners, under article 19(1) remain suspended, on account of the continuance of the proclamation of emergency. the petitioners are not entitled to ..... the pendency of the proclamation of emergency removes the fetters created' on the legislative and executive powers by article 19 and if the legislatures make laws or the executive commits acts which are inconsistent with the rights guaranteed by article 19, their validity is not open to challenge either during the continuance of the emergency or even thereafter.'8. the ..... the present petition, questioning the validity of the above modification. the main grounds of attack are as follows:--(1) the modification contravenes the provisions of ch. iv-a of the act inasmuch as the modification aims at denationalization which is not permissible under that chapter. that chapter provides that the state transport undertaking should run and operate the vehicles itself. the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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