Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1953 Page 1 of about 12 results (0.023 seconds)

May 29 1953 (HC)

Sucha Singh and ors. Vs. Nighaya Ram

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-29-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H86

kapur, j.1. this is a defendants' appeal against an appellate decree passed by mr. jagdish narain kapur, additional district judge, ambala, dated the 21th of december, 1952, confirming the decree of the trial court.2. the facts of the case which have given rise to the appeal are that on the 8th of june, 1915, nighaya and his brother mortgaged occupancy rights of certain land to the predecessors of sucha singh and others for a sum of rs. 1000/-. in 1928 the occupancy tenants applied that they wanted to sell their occupancy rights. an order was made under section 53 of the punjab tenancy act on the 15th of may, 1930, allowing the occupancy tenants to sell 11 bighas 19 biswas to sucha singh for a sum of rs. 675/- out of which rs. 375/-were to be paid within three weeks and rs. 300/-were to go towards the payment of the mortgage. i am informed that rs. 375/- were paid within the time allowed in the order. an appeal was taken against this order by the occupancy tenants which was allowed on the 7th of august, 1930, to this extent that the value was varied from rs. 150/- per bigha to rs. 160/- per bigha. this additional sum of money, it appears, was never paid. on the 19th of january, 1931, a mutation of sale was sanctioned when both the occupancy tenants as well as the mortgagees were present. at that time the occupancy tenants stated that they will file a suit to enforce their right ('lekan ham dawa diwani karenge'). in 1932 a suit was brought by the occupancy tenants claiming .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1953 (HC)

Mst. Ralli Vs. Mst. Gurnam Kaur and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-10-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H14

khosla, j.1. the subject-matter of this appeal is property which belonged to nanda deceased. nanda married twice. by his first wife partapi, he had a daughter ralli who is the plaintiff-appellant in this case. by his second wife santi, he had a daughter gur-nam kaur who is a defendant-respondent. nanda died in 1924 and soon after his death his second widow santi remarried. nanda's property devolved upon his widow santi and then on his unmarried daughter gurnam kaur as santi by her remarriage lost her right in her deceased husband's property. the mutation in favour of gurnam kaur was sanctioned on 1-10-1926. ralli was at that time alive but she was a married woman. she had apparently married before nanda's death. she laid no claim to the property and did not take any steps to get any share of her deceased father's inheritance. on the other hand the collaterals of nanda entered into a contest with gurnam kaur. the proceedings before the revenue officers lasted a considerable time but eventually gurnam kaur's rights were preferred to those of nanda's collaterals. the result was that on 1-10-1926 gurnam kaur was entered as the sole heir of nanda.gurnam kaur married in 1938 or thereabouts. then in 1944 ralli brought the present suit for possession of half share of the property left by nanda. in the plaint ralli alleged in paragraph 3:'about six years ago gurnam kaur defendant no. 1 married. the plaintiff was already married. so now after the marriage of defendant no. 1 the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 1953 (HC)

Dalpat Singh, Etc. Vs. Rajwant Singh, Etc.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jun-09-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H33

kapur, j. 1. this is a defendant's appeal against a judgment and decree of mr. behari lal, subordinate judge 1st class, dated 23-3-1948 decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for possession.2. the parties belong to sandhanwalia family and their relationship will be clear from the pedigree-table, exh. d7 which is at page 124 of the paper book and the pedigree-table given at page 68 of the paper book which when combined is as follows: s. amir singh ___________________________________|___________________________________________ | | | | s. attarsingh s. budhsingh s. wasawa singh s. lehna singh | | (his descendants are owners in | s. kehr singh s. shamsher singh randhir singh) | | | | sardarni har kaur s. bakhshish singh adopted son | | | s. raghbir singh | __________________________________________________________________________|______ | | | | s. partap singh s. thakar singh s. gurdit singh s. bakhshish singh (adorted by | | _________|___________ s. shamsher singh; adopted son of the widows s. narindar singh | | | s. pritam singh s. sarop singh sardarni asil kaur=s. gurbachan singh |___________________________ ________________|_________________ | | baldev kaur (daughter) karam kaur (daughter)(plaintiff 2) ____________|___________ | | rajwant singh (plaintiff 1) dhanraj singh ___________________|____________________ | | prithraj singh (defendant 12) bawishraj singh (defendant 13)3. on 16-8-1944 the plaintiffs brought a suit for possession of 6390 'kanals' 1 'marla' of land in 'mauza' .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 1953 (HC)

Gurdit Singh and ors. Vs. Babu and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-28-1953

Reported in : AIR1953P& H282

kapur, j.1. this is a plaintiffs' appeal against an appellate decree of district judge m. r. bhatia dated 3-8-1948, confirming the decree of the trial court, whereby the suit of the plaintiffs was dismissed.2. the plaintiffs in this case are the collaterals of one amrika who in 1879 made a gift of the property in dispute in favour of his 'pichhlag son fauja. this gift was objected to by the collaterals of amrika but in the revenue department a compromise was arrived at between amrika, fauja and the then existing collaterals that the donee or his descendants will have no right to effect a sale or mortgage of the land and that they will be entitled only to its usufruct. in 1935 the descendants of fauja made an exchange of a portion of the land which was challenged by the collaterals, but the exchange was upheld by the high court by judgment dated 9-7-1943, as the exchange was neither a sale nor a mortgage.3. on 31-871944 the descendants of fauja mortgaged a portion of the land and the collaterals challenged this alienation and sued for possession of the whole of the land gifted on the ground that there was a breach of the terms of the compromise. both the courts below dismissed this suit holding that such a condition which was imposed in the gift was contrary to section 10, t. p. act and was void. the plaintiffs have come up in appeal to this court.4. in order to decide this case it has first to be determined as to what was the effect of the compromise which was arrived at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1953 (HC)

Mt. Parkash Vati Vs. Maya Devi and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-28-1953

Reported in : AIR1953P& H304

kapur, j.1. this is a plaintiff's appeal against an appellate decree of district judge gurdial singh dated 20-2-1948 reversing the decree of the trial court and dismissing the plaintiff's suit but leaving the parties to bear their own costs throughout.2. the disput out of which this appeal has arisen is between the widow of the last male holder and his sisters on 22-1-1936 murari lal gifted the property in dispute which consistedof two houses in abehar mandi to his motherthe gift was an oral one and a report wasmade to the patwari and the mutation' was sanctioned on 24-2-1936. it appears that possession still remained of murari lal with whothe mother was living. soon after the gi(sic)murari lal married the plaintiff parkash va(sic)on 17-5-1937 murari lal died. there is nothingon the record to show that parkash vati plainttiff did continue to live in the house after the death of her husband.3. on 19-6-1945 the mother, mst. budha(sic) gifted the property to her daughters, may devi and shiv devi. the plaintiff as widow (sic) murari lal brought a suit on 1-8-1946 for po(sic) session of one of the houses in abehar, the other having been sold away. several defence were raised but the suit was decreed. the trial court held that section 123, t. p. act which has been extended to municipal committees of the punjab had not been complied with and there fore there was no proper gift. on appeal the learned district judge seems to have gone into all kinds of questions of the sham nature of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 1953 (HC)

Bakhshi Ram Baisakhi Ram Vs. Dewat Ram and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-17-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H116

kapur, j.1. the sole question to be decided in this appeal brought by the defendant against an appellate judgment and decree of mr. sheo parshad, senior subordinate judge, karnal, dated the 20th of june, 1949 is whether the transaction which is sought to be pre-empted is a sale or merely a gift.2. the courts below have differed on this point, the trial court holding that it was a gift and the appellate court holding that it was a sale. the defendant was a servant of the american mission and had served them for eighteen years. on the 29th may 1946 the mission entered into several transactions by which large portions of land were alienated to different persons by documents, the apparent tenor of which was a sale. in this manner the mission has sold away the whole of its land in village santokh majre in tehsil kaithal of karnal district.3. the land, which has been alienated in favour of bakhshi ram defendant by a deed dated 29th may, 1946, is 40 bighas and 4 biswas which has taken the shape of a sale deed for rs. 190/-. the deed recites that the money had already been paid and at the time of registration no money passed from the alleged vendee to the alleged vendors. there were eighteen other similar transactions which also were pre-empted but quite a large number of them did not proceed any further because of compromises which were arrived at between the parties.4. in the present case the plaintiffs brought a suit for pre-emption on the 28th may, 1947. the defence was that it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1953 (HC)

The State Vs. Madan Lal

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-18-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H42

orderfalshaw, j.1. this is a revision petition by the state against an order of a special judge at hissar quashing proceedings against madan lal respondent against whom a case had been instituted under section 5 (2), prevention of corruption act, 1947.2. the case against the respondent was that he had embezzled certain money received by him in his official capacity as an operator at the police radio station at hissar. in the early stages of the case, before any evidence had been recorded, preliminary objections were raised on his behalf that the case could not proceed against him, firstly because the proper sanction for his prosecution under the act had not been obtained, and secondly that the investigation had not been carried out by an officer of the rank of a deputy superintendent of police. the learned special judge, without investigating the question of proper sanction, has found that the case could not proceed against him because the investigation had not been carried out in accordance with the provisions of section 5 (4), prevention of corruption act which reads:'notwithstanding anything contained in the code of criminal procedure, 1898, a police officer below the rank of deputy superintendent of police shall not investigate any offence punishable under sub-section (2) without the order of a magistrate of the first class or make any arrest therefor without a warrant.'it is admitted in the present case that the investigation was carried out by an officer or the rank of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1953 (HC)

Padam Parshad Rattan Chand of Delhi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, De ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-03-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H188; [1954]25ITR335(P& H)

falshaw j. 1.the following question has been referred to us under section 63(1), income tax act, by the income tax appellate tribunal (delhi bench) : 'whether a firm which comes into existence by oral agreement, is entitled to be registered under section 26a, if on the date of the application for registration the terms and conditions of the partnership have been reduced to writing and the application for registration is accompanied by such an instrument?'2. the facts are that the assessee firm messrs. padam parshad-rattan chand of delhi started business as from 1-4-1947, and in the course of the assessment for the year 1948-39 relating to the account year ending on 31-3-1948 an application was made for registration of a partnership under section 26a(1) on the basis of a partnership deed executed by the two partners, rattan chand and padam parshad and specifying their shares in the partnership, on 10-4-1950.this application was dismissed by the income-tax officer on 26-5-1950, and an appeal against his order was dismissed by the appellate assistant commissioner who apparently had before him two appeals relating both to the assessment years 1948-49 and 1949-50. the ground of dismissal was that the profits had not been distributed between the partners.3. a further appeal was made to the appellate tribunal which apparently only related to the year 1948-49. this appeal was also dismissed, but on a different ground, namely that according to the deed itself the partnership business .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1953 (HC)

Ram Richhapal Vs. the State

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-16-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H97

khosla, j.1. the facts from which the present reference to a bench of three judges has arisen are briefly these. one ram rachhpal who was employed as a sub-treasurer in a government treasury was accused of criminal misappropriation punishable under section 409, indian penal code. during the investigation of the case. ram rachhpal made a statement to the police which is contained in a memorandum exh. p. h. after making this statement ram rachhpal led the police party to a place mentioned in the memorandum and from this place several pieces of torn paper were recovered. these when joined showed that the document which had been destroyed was a 'currency chest slip'. these pieces were taken into possession and were later produced as evidence against the accused at the trial.the prosecution also produced the memorandum, p. h. in which the statement made by the accused had been recorded, and proved it under the provisions of section 27 of the indian evidence act as information given by the accused leading to the discovery of a fact. ram rachhpal was convicted and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of rs. 10,000/-. he filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence to this court and the appeal in the first instance came up before my brother, harnam singh, j.mr. sethi who appeared on behalf of the convict contended that the statement made by the accused person could not be proved as it was not this statement which had led to the recovery of the pieces of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 1953 (HC)

Ram Singh NaraIn Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-16-1953

Reported in : AIR1954P& H145

kapur, j. 1. these are two rules obtained against the state of the punjab and two others, one under article 226 of the constitution and section 491, criminal p. c. and the other under articles 226 and 221 of the constitution of india. 2. in criminal writ no. 22 of 1953 it was alleged in the petition dated 17-6-1953 that a woman bachan kaur (her mohammadan name was mst. rusmat) was married to ram singh petitioner about ten years ago and there was a document to support this marriage and this document had been taken possession of by the police when the said bachan kaur was 'arrested by the police' on 21-5-1953, that bachan kaur had been living as the wife of the petitioner for a period of about ten years and had been taken into custody from the house of the petitioner along with four children who were born after 15-8-1947. writ of 'habeas corpus' was prayed for in this case. these allegations were denied by miss s. k. fatima, camp commandant of the muslim camp at jullundur. an application was later made on 20-7-1953, for the production of this woman in court. the petition was granted but subsequently the order for production was discharged. miss mridula sarabhai made an affidavit on 13-8-1953 in this petition in which the marriage mas denied as also the taking into possession of the document evidencing marriage and it was stated that bachan kaur was really mussummat bus-mat and that she had been abducted a month before the breaking out of the disturbances in 1947 and that as the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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