Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: jammu and kashmir Year: 1998 Page 1 of about 26 results (0.014 seconds)

Sep 25 1998 (HC)

Abdullah Jhat and anr. Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and anr.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Sep-25-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ3034

..... accused for separation from the joint family. seven months after the marriage, she left the house against the wishes of the accused and was brought back after great persuasion and mediation by the village elders. however, her relationship with other family members continued to be sore, with the result that the accused remained tense and depressed. the situation was aggravated further .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1998 (HC)

Jangi Ram Vs. State of J. and K.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Feb-18-1998

Reported in : 1998CriLJ3065

g.d. sharma, j.1. this is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 8-9-80 passed by the learned special judge, anti-corruption, jammu whereby the appellant herein has been convicted for the commission of offence falling under section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act, 2006 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and payment of fine of rs. 5000/-. in default of payment of fine he has to undergo further imprisonment for a period of two months. the judgment and order has been challenged on the following grounds :-(i) the sanction for the prosecution of appellant is bad in the eye of law as it has been accorded in a mechanical manner.(ii) that there was no occasion to demand the amount of alleged recovered money from the complainant and the evidence of such demand is wanting in this case. there is also no evidence about the acceptance of the alleged recovered amount.(iii) regarding the alleged recovery of tainted money the evidence is of contradictory nature which cannot be believed.2. the factual matrix of the case is that the appellant in july 1976 was posted as patwari in patwar halqa magowali teh. rs pora. the complainant shri dhanna ram was stated to be residing with his aunt mst. toti devi who during her lifetime had made a will in his favour. that the complainant dhanna ram had been cultivating the land since the year 1965 and appellant demanded rs. 500/- from him as bribe in case he had to remain in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 1998 (HC)

Shanker Vs. Dy. Commissioner and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Jun-26-1998

Reported in : 2005(1)JKJ520

o.p. sharma, j.1. petitioner's case is that he was in possession of land measuring 10 kanals comprising khasra no. 549-min. situate in village kawa tehsil udhampur. since the land was owned by the state, he was entitled to its ownership under lb-6/c of 1958 because he was holding the possession much prior to 1957. however, tehsildar udhampur by order dated 25-11-75, directed his eviction from the aforesaid land. this order of tehsildar was challenged by him in appeal no. 139/1972-73 titled shanker v. state, which was allowed by the dy. commissioner by his order dated 22-09-73. the deputy commissioner while allowing the appeal not only set-aside the order of ejectment passed by the tehsildar, udhampur but also directed him to mutate the aforesaid land in the name of the petitioner under government order no. lb-6/c of 1958. so, petitioner's possession over the land was maintained. latter this land was acquired by the state and award made in 1994 but since the mutation was not attested in favour of the petitioner, he has not been paid compensation for the same.2. the relief claimed by the petitioner is thus two folds:(i) that the mutation be attessted in his favour, as directed by the deputy commissioner under govt. order no. lb-6/c of 1958 and ownership conferred upon him; and(ii) that he be paid the compensation as the land has been acquired for defence purposes.3. in the counter filed on behalf of the respondents state, the defence pleaded is that the petitioner having failed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1998 (HC)

Madan Lal Vs. Jagdish Chander

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Mar-23-1998

Reported in : AIR1999J& K1

arun kumar goel, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by district judge, udhampur, on 12-5-1981 there by upholding the decree of the trial court dated 16-6-1979, where by the suit of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') had been dismissed.2. this case has a chequered history and the facts relevant for determination of the present appeal need to be briefly referred to.3. plaintiff filed a suit against the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant') for ejectment from the premises in question which consists of one shop, verandah and an adjacent room. so far description of the tenanted premises and/or relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties is concerned, it is not in dispute. similarly, rate of rent being rs. 92/-per month is also not in dispute. premises in question having been let out by means of a written document is also not in dispute between the parties, as would be seen from the pleadings filed by both of them during the course of trial in the court below. ejectment was claimed by the plaintiff on the plea that after partition of properties having taken place between himself and his father dina nath, tenanted premises fell to his share which were let out to the defendant vide lease deed dated 1-8-1966 for a fixed term of eleven months. since plaintiff had a large family to look after depend ent on him and his income was very meagre from his employment at his father's shop where he was drawing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1998 (HC)

Gotam Raj Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Feb-10-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ479

y. kawoosa, j.1. the whole prosecution case more or less reels round the statement of one madavan, hawaldar, who is stated to have detected the murder of the deceased israil khan, assistant commandant, central reserve police force. the prosecution story which has been built up on his statement reveals that on 31-5-1992, 5th batallion of crpf was posted at the house of ex-chief secretary, mir nassar-ullah situated at batwara, srinagar. constable kali dass was on duty from 2 to 4 p.m. on the main gate of the house and, after he completed his duty, accused gotam rai, constable was posted on guard duty of the main gate. gotam rai had earlier made several requests to deceased israil khan, assistant commandant for grant of leave so that he could visit his house after a long spell of time. it is stated that registered letter also had been received by the assistant commandant that the mother of the appellant was ill, so he should visit his house. however, the repeated requests of appellant, gotam rai, were not acceded to. the deceased assured him that he would be granted leave only after change of station. however, on the said unfortunate date of 31st may, 1992, appellant, gotam rai, during his duty hours, at 5 p.m. again approached the assistant commandant, israil khan and requested him for grant of leave. again israil. khan is stated to have refused the leave to the appellant, though the deceased on the same date had sanctioned leave to his two blue-eyed constables. this provoked .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 1998 (HC)

Bashir Ahmad Shah Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : May-27-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ1717

orderg.l. raina, j.1. while facing trial in sessions case no. 49/96 on the dockets of sessions judge, baramulla, the accused's attempts to secure bails aborted as the trial court turned down his two successive applications to that effect. it is thus that the accused has come up seeking indulgence so that he gets bailed out from incarceration pending determination of his guilty. 2. in order to dispose of a bail motion reference to the broad features of the case cannot be avoided. reference to the nature and character of the evidence sought to be relied on to sustain the charge is inevitable as section 497, cr.p.c. creates the bar to the exercise of discretion to grant bails in cases where reasonable grounds exist to believe that the accused person(s) is/are guilty of the offence punishable by death or imprisonment for life: the formation of this belief depends on the evidence to be offered by the prosecution to prove the charge.3. the court has thus to consider the nature and the character of the evidence as the proposition of the law is well established that principles governing grant of bails under section 497, cr.p.c. are to govern the disposal of bail motions under section 498 of the code as well. it is thus that reference to the facts on which the present case is based is essential as otherwise the bail motion cannot be disposed of justly.4. on the basis of the report of occurrence, the case was registered in p/s baramulla as fir no. 19/86 for the offence punishable under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 1998 (HC)

Ghulam Mohi-ud-dIn Najar Vs. Addl. Chief Secretary, Homes and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Sep-29-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ1911

ordersyed bashir-ud-din, j.1. ghulam mohi-ud-din najar has been detained under order dated 01-01-1998 of district magistrate, srinagar, respondent no. 2 for a period of 18 (eighteen) months under section 8 of the jammu and kashmir public safety act of 1978, (hereinafter, for short act).2. this order of detention is under challenge in this petition filed by the detenu's brother on the following grounds :-(i) the detention case has not been referred to the advisory board within the prescribed time and board has not also given its opinion and report with respect to sufficiency or otherwise of the cause for detention within the required time period. failure to refer the matter to the board and submission of the opinion and report by the board to the government within stipulated time period as statutorily laid down by the provisions of the act, invalidates the detention;(ii) the detenu has not been served with order of detention. he has not been informed of his right of making representation against the detention to the government;(iii) material referred in the grounds of detention has not been supplied to him. this has prevented the detenu to make an effective representation against the detention;(iv) the grounds of detention supplied to the detenu in english language were not understood by him, as the grounds were not accompanied by a translation in urdu or kashmiri. the grounds were unintelligible to him. thereby, he has been prejudicially effected in making representation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 1998 (HC)

Harshdev Singh, Mla Vs. Election Commission of India and anr.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Jan-27-1998

Reported in : AIR1998J& K80

gandhi, j. 1. petitioner has presented this petition seeking to quash para 6(2)(b) of the election symbols (reservation and allotment) order, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'symbols order 1968') as ultra vires and to issue appropriate directions for setting aside the order dated 29-8-1997 issued by respondent no. 1 whereby the recognition granted to the jammu and kashmir panthers party as a state party in the j & k state in terms of paras 6 & 7 of the symbols order 1968 as well as under the provisions of the jammu and kashmir conduct of election rules, 1965, has been withdrawn thereby disentitling the party to exclusively use the symbol 'bicycle' for the purpose of election. 2. the petition was initially heard by the learned single judge who has referred it to the larger bench for disposal.3. the petitioner has projected in the petition that the jammu & kashmir panthers party is a recognised stale party in the state of jammu and kashmir, under the symbols order 1968 and the symbol of 'bicycle' has been reserved for the party for the purposes of election to the house of the people and to the state legislature in the state. the party was so recognised in 1985 and contested election in 1987. respondent no. 1, has, by the impugned order, withdrawn the recognition on the ground that the party has not secured 4 per cent, votes in terms of para 6(2)(b) of the symbols order 1968. the petitioner has challenged the impugned order being illegal, improper, unconstitutional and ultra .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 1998 (HC)

Shahid Sheikh Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Dec-28-1998

Reported in : 2000CriLJ298

orderarun kumar goel, j. 1. this revision is directed against the order dated 23-12-1997 passed by sessions judge, jammu. by means of impugned order it has been held that on examination of the materials on record there exists prima facie case against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 for sending them to trial, and consequently charge under section 3 of j & k prevention & separation of sabotage act, 1965; sections 302/307 read with section 120-b, rpc has been ordered to be framed against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4.2. case as setup in the court below against all the accused is that on 29-3-1997 respondents with a criminal intent planted explosive device (rdx) in an ambassador car as also in its dicky. while doing so accused were well aware that explosion of rdx would cause loss of human lives as well as property. this car was brought pursuant to a conspiracy hatched on the night intervening 15-16 march, 1997 at baba muslim hotel, talab kharikan, jammu, when it was decided to cause an explosion in a crowded area, the aim whereof was to cause terror in the public at large as well as to de-stabilise the government by use of arms, ammunition and explosives. for achieving this unlawful end, explosive was managed by other accused, as detailed in the challan. ambassador car was brought from delhi and a fictitious number plate puh-3307 was affixed thereon. its chassis and engine number were also tampered with. this car was brought to bathindi at darul-allom being run by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1998 (HC)

Wasthim Travels and Tours Vs. J. and K. Bank Ltd. and anr.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Dec-03-1998

Reported in : AIR1999J& K88

1. this appeal is directed against the order dt. 15-10-1998 passed by the jammu and kashmir states consumers protection commission, whereby complaint of the appellant herein (complaint no. 219/95) was not entertained on the grounds that it contained stale claims. 2. the factual matrix of the case is that in the year 1987, the appellant was carrying on the business of a travel agent and had organised a tour of the pilgrims to a foreign country. the expenses to be incurred for this pilgrimage were deposited by the appellant in the saving account no. 796 maintained by respondent. this was done for the purpose of getting foreign exchange. on 24-1-89, a sum of rupees one lakh twenty thousand was deducted on account of travel tax. the appellant contends that the said amount could not be deducted because pilgrimage tour had been exempted from paying travelling tax. according to him, the respondent had failed to render service to him as a consumer. 3. respondent had contested the claim of the complainant by pleading that tax was legally leviable as the tour was conducted in the year 1987 when no exemption for paying such tax had been incorporated in the concerned law. 4. the commission did not entertain the complaint on the ground that a stale claim had been brought to be enforced which was not permissible. as per the showing of the appellant, he had the knowledge of the deduction of tax on 24-1-89. the cause of action to file the complaint had accrued to him on this day but without .....

Tag this Judgment!


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