Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: pepsu court of wards act 2008 bk Year: 1958

Apr 28 1958 (HC)

Dewa Singh Vs. Lal Singh and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-28-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H601

..... 44 of the patiala judicature farman. 1999, reproduced above. 6. the patiala judicature farman, 1999 and the pepsu high court ordinange (no. ii of 2005 bk.) were repealed by section 119 of ordinance no. x or 2005 bk. which came into force on 25-10-1948. it is section 52 of this ordinance which is now ..... these reasons, i am of opinion that an appeal under section 52 of ordinance no. x of 2005 bk. against the decision of a single judge in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction of the pepsu high court would not be competent.11. a distinction was sought to be made out by mr. dalip chand, learned ..... of which the proviso fails to convey the complete sense. no decree can ever be passed in the exercise of the criminal appellate jurisdiction of the high court; use of the term 'decree' in conjunction with 'judgment' or 'order' is un-understandable. it does not stand to reason that while excluding the ..... except where the judgment, decree or order is made in exercise of criminal appellate jurisdiction or in exercise of the powers of superintendence vested in the high court. the section, as it stands, does not make any exception in case of judgment, decree or order made in exercise of the civil or criminal ..... election tribunal to issue notice to the parties to the election petition, before recording a finding under section 99(1)(a) of the representation of the people act. 1951. it was contended that under section 99(1)(a) the tribunal has to record the names 'of all persons' who arc proved to have .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 21 1958 (HC)

Gurbinder Singh and ors. Vs. Lal Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-21-1958

Reported in : AIR1959P& H123

..... was admittedly contained in the ordinance relied upon by mr. atma ram as well as other learned counsel.this ordinance (no. x of 2005 bk) purported to consolidate and amend the law relating to the courts in pepsu and it came into force there in august, 1948, but even before then there was another procedural law in force with which we are not ..... provision corresponding to the code of civil procedure and consequently stood repealed.punjab act 38 of 1957 was meant to extend the punjab courts act along with certain other acts to the pepsu territory, and as a good part of section 49 of the pepsu ordinance corresponded to the provisions contained in the punjab courts act the legislature provided that, in spite of such extension, the extended provisions ..... his argument mr. nehra sought assistance from the fact that after the re-organisation of the states when pepsu was merged with the punjab on the 1st november, 1956. the punjab legislature enacted punjab act no. 38 of 1057, extending certain acts including the pun-jab courts act to the transferred territory, i.e., pf'psu,' and while doing so exnressly provided in section 4 ..... that kehar singh was a bona fide transferee having bought the property from the rata for valuable consideration and' must be protected by section 41 of the transfer of property act. this section is expressed thus:'section 41. where, with the consent, express or implied, of the persons interested in im-movenble property, a person is the ostensible owner of such .....

Tag this Judgment!

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