Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: punjab and haryana Year: 1948 Page 3 of about 100 results (0.041 seconds)

Nov 23 1948 (PC)

Chet Singh Vs. Anjuman Imdad Bahmi Qarza

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-23-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H318

..... again came to the high court in second appeal and the appeal was dismissed by falshaw, j. on 22nd april 1946. the present appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent is directed against the judgment of falshaw, j. in r.s.a. no. 1882 of 1944, decided on 22nd april 1946.4a. the learned single judge has dismissed the appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 04 1948 (PC)

Pirji Safdar Ali Vs. the Ideal Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-04-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H94

1. execution second appeals nos. 1654 of 1946 and 1553 of 1946 have been referred to a full bench in view of the difficulty and importance of certain questions of law that arise in them. the most important question which necessitated this reference wag whether the authority of the division bench judgments of this court in thakar das v. roshan din a.i.r. 1933 lah. 897, chhaju ram v. muzaffar ahmad a.i.r. 1936 lah. 845 and sahib dayal and anr. v. jamaluddin and ors. a.i.r. 1937 lah. 194 had not been impaired by the full bench judgment in punjab national bank ltd. ferozepore city v. ram karan ramji lal and ors. a.i.r. 1940 lah. 370 (f.b.) and whether those judgments can otherwise be held to lay down good law. the question involved in these judgments was whether in view of section 16, punjab alienation of land act, the executing court had jurisdiction to refuse sale of the land belonging to a member of a notified agricultural tribe when the decree sought to be executed was a mortgage decree and contained a direction for the sale of agricultural land covered by the mortgage.2. in order to properly appreciate the points involved in these appeals and to find a correct solution to the problems raised it is necessary to set out shortly the facts and the circumstances that have led to this reference. one pirji safdar ali, a resident of delhi, is a lessee of certain rights in agricultural land measuring 26 bighas 16 biswas kham in the area of mauza basalwa, tahsil balabgarh, district .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1948 (PC)

Sat Pal Deceased Represented by Mt. Shanti Devi and ors. Vs. Abdul Hay ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-27-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H1

mahajan, j.1. regular second appeal no. 493 of 1946 has been referred to a pull bench for returning answers to the following questions of law:1. can a civil court enquire into the question whether a creditor failed to be present at a hearing before a debt conciliation board for sufficient cause as contemplated by section 13, punjab belief of indebtedness act of 1934?2. if so, is the creditor entitled to show that he was absent for sufficient cause and that therefore his debt was not discharged?3. is the jurisdiction of the civil court affected by the fact that the creditor has or has not made an application to the board for reviving his debt under sub-section (4) of section 13, punjab relief of indebtedness act of 1934?3. the facts giving rise to this reference are these abdul hayi and his son abdul shakur mortgaged a house at amritsar in the sum of rs. 2000 to sat pal on 2nd may 1940. on 4th january 1943, abdul hayi submitted an application to the debt conciliation board under section 9 for conciliation of his debt. an objection raised on behalf of the creditor that the board had jurisdiction concerning this mortgage debt was overruled by the board on 6th february 1943. on 5th may 1944, the board made the following order:parties are present. the debt to the extent of rs. 2600 is proved. let the debtor bring rs. 600 in. cash and if he does so the creditor is willing to accept instalments for the rest of the amount. the debtor-should arrange for this amount by 4th july 1914, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 01 1948 (PC)

Narotam Chand and anr. Vs. Mst. Durga Devi

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Oct-01-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H109

mahajan, j.1. regular second appeal no. 979 of 1946 had been referred to a full bench of five judges to settle two questions of law, the decision of which would result in the decision of the appeal itself. the first question is whether act (1 [1] of 1920)(punjab limitation (custom) act) governs suits brought by female heirs or other cognate relations to challenge alienations made by a widow who is in possession of the property of her husband and which had descended to him from his ancestors, the other question is whether the property of a maternal grandfather in the hands of the grandson can be treated ancestral qua his son, and can be regarded as such while it is in the hands of the daughter, in other words, whether any property in the hands of a female heir can be regarded as ancestral immovable property within the meaning of the term as usually understood in customary law.2. in the decision of this question, the correctness of the full bench decision of the punjab chief court in lehna v. mt. thakri 32 p.r.1895 and of the full bench decision of the lahore high court in mt. attar kaur v. nikkoo a.i.r.1924 lah.538 has to be examined.3. the facts leading to this reference have been stated in my reference order of 24th june 1948, and may shortly be recapitulated. in the suit giving rise to this second appeal, mt. durga devi, the daughter of one kalu from mt. gauran, challenged two gifts made by her mother in favour of one mangtu, daughter's son of the same kalu from his second .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1948 (PC)

In Re: Hardial Singh S/O Rallia Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-13-1948

Reported in : 1949CriLJ370

achhru ram, j.1. this order will dispose of 16 petitions under section 491, criminal p. c., namely, cr. m. 326 of 1948 to 840 of 1948 and or. m, no. 243 of 1948. the first 15 petitions were made by one jagdish mittar, son of salig rarn, resident of cart road, simla, on behalf of the following 15 persons : (1) eameshwar dayal, son of kanhaya lai, resident of sabzi mandi, delhi. (2) kailash nath sharma, son of pt. prabhu putt shaatri, resident of chandni chauk, delhi. (3) mangal sain, son of kewal ram, resident of bareilly, u. p. u) narindar kumar, son of hari shankar, resident of mahrauli. (5) chhajju earn, son of nandu ram, resident nangli, district delhi. (6) prameshri das, son of lakshman das, resident of shahdara. (7) rameshwar das, son of munshi ram, resident of narela, district delhi. (8) vishwa nath, son of amar nath, resident of bazzar sita earn, delhi, (9) aho earn, son of raghbir saran, resident of balaini, district meerut. (10) kanwar sain, son of prahiad eai, resident of pahari dhiraj, delhi. (11) bam bhagat, son of ram kishen das, resident of sadar bazar, delhi. (12) ajudhia narain, son of pt. jagat narain, resident of sabzi mandi, delhi. (13) dharam bir, son of malak locha ram, resident of sabzi mandi, delhi. (14) balkrishan, be n of brij lai, resident of sabzi mandi, delhi. (16) surendar sharma, son of jai dev sharma, resident of shahdara, delhi.2. the 16th petition was made by one har-. dial singh of delhi.3. in the first 15 petitions, the petitioner jagdish .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1948 (PC)

Mathra Dass Vs. Punjab Province

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jul-27-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H246

achhru ram, j.1. this second appeal has arisen out of the suit brought by one mathra das, a resident of batala, against the punjab province through the collector of gurdaspur for a declaration to the effect that he was in possession as a tenant of ahatas nos. 27 and 28 situate in the bairuni mandi (the outer market) of batala and for issue of a perpetual injunction to the defendant restraining it from ejecting the plaintiff from those ahatas.2. it is common ground between the parties that two plots of building sites situate in the bairuni mandi (outer market) of batala recorded as ahatas nos. 27 and 28 and owned by the. government had been on lease with mathra das plaintiff for some years. it is again common ground that the contracts of lease under which the plaintiff had been holding the sites had been contracts of yearly lease, the lease having been renewed at the end of each year. it is further admitted by the parties that the period of the last lease expired on 31st march 1915 when the provincial government let out the premises to someone else who had given the highest bid for the rent at an auction held under its orders. the plaintiff brought his suit on 24th may 1945, alleging that he being ready and willing to continue as a tenant of the suit premises under the defendant on the old terms and having never made default in payment of the rent as it accrued due, the defendant was not entitled to eject him accept in compliance with the provisions of the punjab rent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1948 (PC)

Kidar Nath S/O Siri Ram Vs. the Crown

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-23-1948

Reported in : 1949CriLJ756

khosla, j.1. this is a petition under a. 23, press (emergency powers) act, xxiii [23] of 1981. the petitioner before us is shree kidar nath, the keeper of the press known as the printers ltd., of ambala cantonment. he was ordered by the east punjab government to deposit a sum of rs. 8,000 as security under section 3, sub-section (8), press (emergency powerb) act on account of the publication of an article 'yeh kaun aya hai' in the 'weekly insaf of 4th august 1948. it was alleged that this article contained matter which 'tends directly or indirectly to bring into hatred or contempt the government established by law or to excite disaffection towards the said government' within the meaning of clause (d), sub-section (l) of section 4, indian press (emergency powers) act. the petitioner has moved this court for the cancellation of the order of the punjab government.2. the learned counsel for the petitioner raised three points before us. he argued in the first place that incitement to violence was an essential ingredient of the offence contemplated by the provisions of section 4 and that unless the published matter contained a direct incitement to violence no order for the deposit of security under sub-section (8) of section 3, could be passed.3. in the second place, it was argued that the article contained at worst an attack on the east punjab ministry and that an attack on the ministry was not the same thing as an attack on the government as established by law. therefore, be it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 30 1948 (PC)

Gokal Vs. Haria and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Dec-30-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H414

achhru ram, j.1. this second appeal has arisen in the following circumstances. one mt. sobhan widow of sidhu was the owner of the property in dispute which consists of a vacant site and a compound, at one time there was a house constructed on this property. in the year 1906 the plaintiff who was one of the collaterals of sidhu purchased the aforesaid house from mt. sobhan with the consent of his own father gurmukh, who was then alive and hira, another collateral of sidhu, who seems to have died without leaving any heirs. moti, haku and bisakhi, three brothers of gurmukh, father of the plaintiff, brought a suit for the usual declaration which was decreed in their favour on 7th february 1908. a declaratory decree was granted by the court in favour of the plaintiffs to the effect that the sale by mt. sobhan in favour of haria would not affect their reversionary rights after the vendor's death and that they would be entitled to recover possession of their share in the property after the widow's death without any payment. mt. sobhan died on 24th august 1922. the aforesaid moti, haku and bisakhi did not bring any suit for possession of their bhare of the property sold by the aforesaid mt. sobhan in favour of haria within the time allowed by punjab act i [l] of 1920. on 2nd april 1946 haria brought the suit which has given rise to the present second appeal impleading all the descendants of dola, his own grandfather, who are the nearest collaterals of sidhu at the present moment. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 07 1948 (PC)

Wasal Vs. Harnam Singh

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jun-07-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H53

achhru ram, j.1. the facts of this case have been stated at length in my order of reference dated 16th march 1948 and need not be recapitulated. the dispute in this case relates to a one-half undivided share in 142 kanals and 16 marlas of land situate in the village jandwala in muktsar tahsil, ferozpure district. this land was originally occupied by one baghela as a tenant under guru amar singh, the father of guru harnam singh plaintiff. in the revenue records he was described as a non-occupancy tenant of the aforesaid land. however, after his death, in a suit brought by him to contest the validity of a notice of ejectment, served at the instance of the aforesaid guru amar singh, on him and his two nephews fazal din and fateh din, the sons of his deceased brother allu. wasal, son of the aforesaid baghela, succeeded in establishing that the aforesaid baghela was in fact an occupancy tenant under section 5(c), punjab tenancy act, of the land mentioned above. on this finding the aforesaid notice of ejectment was cancelled by the assistant collector whose decision, though modified by the collector on appeal, was restored by the learned commissioner.2. the second appeal giving rise to this reference has arisen out of a suit brought by guru harnam singh, one of the sons of the aforesaid guru amar singh, against wasal for possession of a half share in the tenancy comprising 142 kanals and 16 marlas of land, on the allegations that the defendant's above mentioned nephews having .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 06 1948 (PC)

In Re: Sri Ram Gautama

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-06-1948

Reported in : AIR1949P& H83

bhandari, j.1. this is an application by one mr. siri ram gautama for admission to the roll of advocates of the high court of the east punjab, or, in the alternative, for admission as a pleader to the said high court.2. mr. gautama who is a resident of jullandur district was admitted as a pleadar of the chief court of the punjab in march 1916 and as an advocate of the high court at lahore on 25th february 1927. he left india towards the end of august 1929 and was admitted to practise as an advocate of his majesty's supreme court of kenya in march 1930. in the year 1941 he was charged with the offence of having offered an illegal gratification to a police prosecutor. a conviction followed and a sentence was passed and thereupon as a matter of course his name was struck off the roll of advocates on 26th june 1942. a copy of the order by which he was dismissed was forwarded to the high court at lahore and mr. gautama's name was removed from the roll of the said high court on 22nd april 1946. on the enactment of the independence act, 1947, the punjab was split up into two provinces each province having a high court of its own. on 7th october 1947, mr. gautama applied to the high court of the east punjab for restoration of his name to the roll of advocates but was informed that this court had no jurisdiction to restore the name of an advocate whose name had been removed by an order of the high court at lahore. on 6th march 1948, the petitioner applied to this court for fresh .....

Tag this Judgment!


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