Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1955 Page 1 of about 8 results (0.026 seconds)

Oct 07 1955 (HC)

Niamat Singh Vs. Darbari Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-07-1955

Reported in : AIR1956P& H230

1. this second appeal raises two questions namely (1) whether the suit brought by the plaintiff is barred by time, and (2) whether the plaintiff having relinquished his own rights in a certain plot of land is entitled to bring a suit for the restoration thereof.2. one naunid singh, a resident of village barwala of the delhi state died in the year 1935 leaving behind him darbari singh plaintiff, a son by one wife, and niamat singh and chhotu ram defendants, sons by another wife. on 14-6-1935 the parties appeared before a revenue officer and the land left by the deceased was mutated equally in the names of each of the three sons.shortly thereafter the second wife of the deceased gave birth to a posthumous son by the name of ehup singh. the parties again appeared before the revenue officer in the year 1938 and the said officer mutated the land in the names of all the four sons. on 25-8-1949 darbari singh brought a suit for a declaration that he was the owner in possession of a one-half share in the estate of his father and that the remaining half share belonged to his step-brothers the defendants. the trial court granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff and the decree of the trial court was upheld by the district judge in appeal. the defendants are dissatisfied with the order and have come to this court in second appeal.3. the first point for decision in the present case is whether the plaintiff's right to bring the suit has been extinguished by efflux of time. it is common .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 1955 (HC)

S. Prem Singh Lala Sunder Dass and Ors. Vs. Deputy Custodian-General, ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-26-1955

Reported in : AIR1955P& H177

falshaw, j.1. briefly the facts giving rise to this reference to the full bench are that there was a three-cornered contest regarding the allotment of evacuee lands in a village called ratauli in the ambala district between n. r. batra, a group consisting of prem singh and narain singh, sons of sunder dass, and raj kaur, wife of narain singh, and hargobind and jai kishan, sons of dewan chand suri.by an order dated 17-7-1952 the custodian of evacuce property, punjab, ordered that n. r. batra was not entitled to be accommodated in village ratauli at the expense of either of the other parties.2. against this order n. r. batra filed a revision petition under section 27 of the act before the custodian-general on 9-9-1952, i.e., within the ordinary period of limitation for filing such petitions. this revision petition was decided by mr. chhakan lal, deputy custodian-general, by his order dated 18-8-1953, which had the effect of cancelling the allotment of prem singh, etc., in ratauli to the extent of 112 standard acres 7 units, i.e., the extent necessary to accommodate n. r. batra in that village. the other respondents in the revision petition, hargobind and jai kishan, were held to be entitled to remain in enjoyment of the land allotted to them.3. this order ot the deputy custodian-general was challenged by prem singh, etc., in a petition filed in this court under article 226 of the constitution (civil writ no. 269 of 1933) in which 'inter alia' the point was raised that the order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1955 (HC)

Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. K.L. Kapur

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-24-1955

Reported in : AIR1958P& H93

falshaw, j.1. this is an appeal by the delhi cloth and general mills company limited, delhi, against a decree passed in favour of k. l. kapur respondent for rs. 46,712/-.2. the facts of the case are to a great extent not in dispute, though some ol their implications are, and are as follows. about december 1945 the plaintiff, k. l. kapur, who possesses a diploma in engineering from the maclagan engineering college at lahore and claims to be an expert in the branch of industrial technology described as 'time and motion study' approached the company with a view to placing his skill at its disposal for the purpose of effecting economies in the running of its factories. he was successful in persuading the management to give his methods a trial and the only terms of the contract subsequently entered into between the parties are embodied in the letters p. 2, p. 3 and p. 4. the first of these dated the 29th of january, 1946 is addressed by the managing directors of the company to the plaintiff and reads:--(page 87).'reference your letter no. d. m. i dated the 28th december, 1945, please note that the terms on which we are prepared to engage you for study of time and motion in our mills are as follows :-- we will pay you 10% of the savings effected annually for the first year only. 2 1/2 of this amount will be payable after three months of the completion of your work to our satisfaction 21/2 after six months and the balance after one year. the payment will not be for suggestions only, .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1955 (HC)

Deva Sharma Vs. Laxmi NaraIn Gaddodia and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-12-1955

Reported in : AIR1956P& H49

falshaw, j. 1. on a difference of opinion between khosla and kapur jj.. in three connected appeals (regular first appeals nos. 13, 14 and 15 of 1953) the following points have been referred to me for decision under section 98, civil p. c. 1. is the restriction imposed by clause 3 of the partnership agreement enforceable in law? 2. is the plaintiff entitled to the relief of injunction as claimed by him? - 3. is the plaintiff entitled to the relief in respect of accounts? 4. is the suit within limitation? 2. although the facts of the case have been set out at some length in the judgments of the two learned judges who have disagreed, i find it necessary to give at least my own brief version of them. the british india corporation ltd. is the owner of a number of enterprises including the kanpur cotton mills co., and by an agreement in the form of a letter dated 20-3-1937, p. 2, the corporation appointed the firm messrs. l. n, gadodia and co., of which laxmi narain gadodia, the plaintiff, is the proprietor, as selling agents for the sale of ell yarn and cloth produced by the kanpur cotton mills up to 31-12-1937. a few days later, 29-3-1937, laxmi narain gadodia entered into a partnership agreement with deva sharma one of the defendants in the suit, the sole business of the partnership being the said selling agency and the partnership agreement was to continue in force as long as the selling agency business continued. according to the terms of this agreement l. n. gadodia was to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 1955 (HC)

Universal Transport Co. Ltd. Vs. S. Jagjit Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-06-1955

Reported in : AIR1955P& H228

falshaw, j. 1. this case has arisen in connection with settling the list of contributories of the universal transport company limited at jullundur in liquidation. one of the original director of the company, sampuran singh, has objected t0 the inclusion of his name in the list in respect of 50 shares, which according to the records of the company, he agreed to take at the time when the company was being formed in which he was to become one of the original directors.2. the original memorandum and articles of association of the company filed with the registrar of the joint stock companies show that sampuran singh along with six other persons signed at two separate and distinct places an undertaking to take 50 shares in the company, and the articles of association show that this was the minimum qualification for becoming a director, and in article 20 the name of sampuran singh is printed at no. 1 in the list of the first directors of the company.3. the case of sampuran singh is that he is not liable to be made a contributory in respect of 50 shares because at the time when he signed the memorandum and articles of association the figure 50 was not written in the appropriate column and he had at the time stated that he had no intention of taking 50 shares. it also appears that in fact 50 shares were never allotted to him and his name does not appear in the list of persons to whom shares in the company were allotted submitted in due course to the registrar.4. in support of his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 1955 (HC)

Harkishan Dass Narshing Dass Chawla Vs. Kirpal Shah

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-15-1955

Reported in : AIR1955P& H181

kapur, j.1. this is a decree-holder's appeal against an order passed by the executing court dated 2-2-1954 dismissing the application of the decree-holder for execution on the ground that it is barred by time.2. cross-suits were pending in the court of a subordinate judge in gujrauwala. on 10-10-1945 they were referred to arbitration and an award was made in favour of harkishan das, the date of which is not quite clear. objections against the award were dismissed on 19-11-1946 and a decree was passed in accordance with the award on 30-11-1946, the amount being rs. 7,000/-. on 14-1-1947 an appeal was filed in the lahore high court against the order refusing to set aside the award and this appeal was dismissed for default on 6-2-1948 on the ground that the parties were not present and that notices in accordance with the rules of the high court had been issued to the parties.3. the decree-holder made an application for execution on 14-8-1950 in a court at delhi. the judgment-debtor pleaded that the application was barred by time, and there were other pleas also which are not necessary for the purposes of this appeal. the learned judge held that the application was barred by time.in appeal reliance was placed on article 182(2) of the limitation act and it was submitted that as an appeal had been brought the date from which the time for execution begins to run is 6-2-1948.the relevant portion of this article when quoted runs as under:'182. for the three 1. the date of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 1955 (HC)

Ajit Singh and anr. Vs. Hem Raj and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-30-1955

Reported in : AIR1956P& H139

kapur, j.1. this is an appeal brought by the plaintiffs against an appellate decree of the additional district judge, amritsar, confirming the decree of the trial court dismissing the plaintiff's suit for possession.2. the facts of the case are that shankar singh, tile father of the plaintiffs; contracted several debts and one of them was due to hem raj. defendant 1. on 29-3-1934 hem raj obtained an ex parte decree for rs. 800/- against shankar singh and in execution of his decree the land in dispute was sold for rs. 1,000/- on 4-10-1937 subject to a mortgage of rs. 2,100/-.the sale certificate was obtained on 14-1-1938 and the present suit was brought alleging that the original debt on the basis of which the ex parte decree was obtained was without consideration and legal necessity and was not binding upon the plaintiffs. it was also alleged that as a matter of fact no debt was due and the decree was obtained by fraud and the sole was vitiated by the fact that it was sold for a low price, and saht ram defendant 2 who was a member of the joint family with hem raj and purchased it without the court's permission.the defendants denied the correctness of the allegations and pleaded limitation as a bar which plea was sustained by both the courts below, and that is the only point now before me.3. according to the courts below the suit is governed by article 12(a), limitation act which funs as under:'12. to set aside any one yearof the following sales : when the sale is(a) sale in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 09 1955 (HC)

Amba Lal Umrao Singh Ji Vs. L. Harish Chander and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Feb-09-1955

Reported in : AIR1955P& H189

kapur, j. 1. this is a defendant's appeal against a judgment and decree of mr. bahal singh, sub-judge, 1st class, delhi, dated 12-4-1950 decreeing the plaintiff's suit for damages for breach of contract for sale of property situate in karol bagh, delhi.2. the defendants amba lal and sri narain owned 284 sq. yards of land bearing plot no. 38 in block no. 13 in karol- bagh. on 4-12-1946 amba lal entered into an agreement of sale of this plot of land at rs. 35/- per sq. yard, rupees 1,000/- were paid as earnest money and the balance was to be paid within one month. a document ex. p. 2 (or d. 7) was executed to evidence this agreement. the agreement provided that wazir chand the ostensible purchaser was to remit within one month the balance of the price, rs. 8,940/- and also a draft of the power-of-attorney which was to be executed in favour of wazir chand by amba lal who purported to enter into the agreement on behalf of himself as well as sri narain his co-owner.on 6-12-1946 amba lal wrote to wazir chand. asking for the money as well as the draft of the power-of-attomey and on 11-12-1948 wazir chand wrote to the seller, amba lal, that the money will be sent by him by 22-12-1946 and this letter, which is ex. d. 3 and is at page 58, is sought to be used as substituted contract in place of the old contract.3. wazir chand sent a telegram dated 2-1-1947, ex. d. 4 (at page 66), to amba lal stating that he would be arriving at ajmer where the vendors reside on 4th january to, complete .....

Tag this Judgment!


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