Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: himachal pradesh Page 440 of about 4,413 results (0.191 seconds)

Dec 28 1949 (PC)

Mt. Maina Vs. Dhundu

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1950HP33

ORDERBannerji, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Judge of Caamba under Section 100, Punjab Tenancy ACT, recommending that the decree dated 26th July 1949 of the Subordinate Judge, from which an appeal was taken to him, be registered as a decree of a revenue Court inasmuch as the suit was cognizable by a revenue Court. 2. The material facts, as appear from the pleadings and also from the judgment, are as follows: The plaintiff, Mt. Mama, widow of Laddakhi, commenced this suit for possession of land, measuring four acres one kanal and one marla recorded in Khata No. 43 and seven marlas of land, in Khata Nautor at page 26, in village, Melah, pargana Lihl. The defendant took this land from plaintiffs' husband and cultivated it, it is alleged by the plaintiff, OH half batai. In para. 2 of the plaint, the plaintiff, alleged that she had warned the defendant not to prepare land for Rabi crop for 2005 and give up possession of the land, which the defendant refused. 3. The defence w...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1949 (PC)

Sadhu Ram and anr. Vs. Mohammad Ali

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1950HP30

Bannerji, J. 1. These are, an appeal by Sadhu Bam and Bam Swarup, father and son, defendants 2 and 3 and a cross-objection by Mohammad Ali, the plaintiff, from a judgment and decree dated 29th June 1943 of Shri J.N. Bhagat C. J., High Court, Nahan, in civil Appeal No. 2 of 2005. 2. The suit was brought by the plaintiff sometime in Samvat 2003. Defendant 1, Mohammad Khan, had obtained a contract from the Department of Public Works, Nahan, for constructing a part of Bainka Road. Defendants 2 and 3, father and son, were intere9ted in this contract. As a matter of fact, sometime later on, defendant l applied for sanction to the Public Works Department, to assign the benefit of the contract to defendants 2 and 3 and such sanction, it appears from the record, was granted. 3. It was alleged on behalf of the plaintiff that he had supplied labour, under instructions from the defendants, principally from defendant 1 and he had not been paid this amount either by defendant 1 or by defendants 2 an...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1949 (PC)

Virendra Kumar Tripathi Vs. the Crown

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 1951CriLJ3

Falshaw, J.1. This judgment will deal with three petitions under Section 491, Criminal P.C., Or. Misc. nos. 252, 253 and 254 of 1949. All the three petitions have been filed by one person, Mr. Virendra Kumar Tripathi, on behalf of three different persona who have been placed under detention by the Delhi authorities, namely, Mr. Mohammad Yamin, his wife Mrs. Sara Yamin, and Professor Yag Datt Sharma. All these persons were originally arrested and placed under detention by orders of the Deputy Commissioner of Delhi under Section 3, Punjab Public Safety Act of 1947 as extended to the Province of Delhi and the period of their detention has been subsequently extended by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi under Section 3, East Punjab Public Safety Act of 1949 which has also been extended to the Province of Delhi. In each case the petitioner has alleged that the detention of these persona is illegal on various grounds. In none of the petitions has Mr. Virendra Kumar Tripathi disclosed that he ha...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1949 (PC)

Ram Singh Vs. the Crown

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 1951CriLJ99

Harnam Singh, J.1. This order disposes of criminal Appeals nos. 623 and 682 of 1948 and Criminal Revision No. 180 of 1948.2. Piara Singh, son of Dalip Singh, caste Jat, resident of Mahal Khurd in Jullundur district, and Earn Singh son of Mahla Singh caste Jat, resident of Panch Malla in district Hissar, have been convicted under Sections 302 and 379, Penal Code, and sentenced to transportation for life each under Section 302, Penal Code, and to three yeats' rigorous imprisonment each under Section 379, Penal Code, Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently Piara Singh and Ram Singh appeal while the Crown has applied for the enhancement of the sentences imposed upon the appellants under Section 302, Penal Code,3. Briefly stated, the facts are that in the middle of October, 1947 Gurbachan Singh approver p, W. 14 was called to village Lambi Dhab by Bachan Singh of that village. He went there and on going to Lambi Dhab, be met Bam Singh and Piara Singh who were staying at the...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1949 (PC)

Gopal Vs. the Crown

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1950HP18

Bannerji, J.1. The appellant, Gopal, was tried before the Court of Sessions Judge, Mahasu, on a charge of shooting at a man, named Kharia, of village Kudral (Pargana Mafciana) in Theog, under Section 807, Penal Code, and of participating in the shooting and killing of a man, named Karam Das, of the same village, under Section 302, read with Section 34, Penal Code.2. Paras Ram, alias Palta, was also tried with his brother, Gopal, the appellant, on a charge of shooting and killing Karam Dag, under Section 302, Penal Code and of participating in shooting at Kharia, on a charge under Section 307, read with Section 34, Penal Code.3. The assessors found the accused Paras Bam, alias, Palta, innocent of both the charges and the learned Sessions Judge, agreeing with the opinion of the assessors, observed that 'the guilt of Paras Ram, alias, Palta, has not been brought home to him'. He accordingly acquitted him.4. Agreeing with the opinion of the assessors, the learned Sessions Judge found the a...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 1949 (PC)

Daulatia and anr. Vs. Jaiya

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1950HP36

ORDERBannerji, J. 1. This revision, which is directed against a judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Kasumpti, dated 29th April 1949, relates to the ownership of 14 biswas of land out of Khasra No. 4, Khata no. 7 of village Bagra (Theog), which is claimed, on the one hand, by the petitioners (Daulatia and Sita Ram) and on the other, by the opposite party, Jaiya, by whom the suit was commenced on 7th August 1947. 2. The dispute, which relates to ownership and possession of land, was properly cognizable by the Subordinate Judge of Theog. He dismissed the suit on 15th October 1948. On 20th November 1948, an appeal was taken to Shri Jagannath Bhagat, District Judge, Mahasu, under Section 31 (a), Himachal Pradesh (Courts) Order, 1948, which had come into force on 15th August 1948. By the said section, it was enacted that; 'Appeals from decrees of Courts exercising original jurisdiction shall lie, (a) from a decree of a Subordinate Judge in a suit of value not exceeding five ...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 1949 (PC)

Haria Vs. Bhindru and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1950HP8

Bannerji, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Chief Judicial Officer, Simla Hill States at Kasumpti, dated 31st July 1948, reversing a judgment and decree of the District Judge, Theog State, dated 31st July 1947, and thereby dismissing the suit. 2. This is a dispute between three proprietors holding estates respectively in villages, Shariana and Batog in Theog State and Moond in Sirmur State, now comprised in Himachal Pradesh. Each of the landed proprietors of Shariana and Moond maintained that he was the absolute owner to the exclusion of the rest. But the proprietors of Batog estate, save a solitary exception, maintained that all these three estates were joint property. Bali Ram of village Batog defendant 11 claimed that the Batog estate had fallen to the share of defendants 4 to 11 and have been mutually partitioned amongst them without any reference to the plaintiff or to defendants 1 to 3. 3. The case of the plaintiff wag, in substance, that he was the owner of the Sha...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 15 1949 (PC)

Jaban Das Vs. Ganga Ram and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1949HP7

Bannerji, J.C.1.The appellant in this case is the defendant in the suit, which the four respondents instituted by plaint dated 25-12-2003 B. The prayer of the plaint is for a declaration that the mutation No. 925 dated 20-11-1998 B is wrong and incorrect and consequently it is void and inoperative.2. It is further prayed that on the death of Man Das without issue, the plaintiffs are entitled to two-third share and the defendant, 1/3, in the lands situated in two villages, Kuthain and Manun.3. The case is simple enough but it appears that sufficient care has not been bestowed upon it by the learned District Judge, Rampur. It is, therefore, desirable that this Court should endeavour to exclude from this judgment all such details as might obscure the question raised in this suit. It may be well then to consider the respective positions of parties in the language adopted by them.4. The narrative of the plaintiffs' case is on the death of Man Das, ancestor of the parties, who was issueless,...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1949 (PC)

Koti Darbar Vs. Ram Chand

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : 1950CriLJ160

Bennerji, J.C.1. Under Section 24 of the Koti State Courts Act. corresponding to Section 417, Criminal P.C., the Koti caber directed the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the Court of the Chief Judicial Officer at Kasumpti against an order of the Magistrate, First Class, Sanjauli (Koti State) dated 21st December 1946, acquitting the respondent, Earn chand, of an offence Under Section 411, Penal Code, Ad appeal was accordingly presented and was pending in the Court of The Chief Judicial Officer at Kasumpti.2. By virtue of the Notification No. J-79-I5/48, lated 14th January 1919, this appeal has been transferred to the Judicial Committee for disposal.3. On 8th- October 1945, the manager of a Hotel in Simla reported to the police that several iheffca had taken place in the hotel during the j light of 7th October 1945. On 9th October 1945, he respondent was arrested by the Simla police on suspicion. On 11th October, the respondent vas taken to Sanjauli in Eoti State for discovery o...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1949 (PC)

Haroo Vs. Man Dass and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1949HP4

ORDERBannerji, J.C.1. This is an application in revision under the provision of para. 35 of the Himachal Pradesh (Courts) Order 1948, against a judgment and decree dated 25th May 1949, of the District Judge, Mahasu, reversing a judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Jubbal, dated 28th December 1948, and thereby decreeing the suit.2. Man Dass, Kesru, Jhina and Jhia are four brothers, owning the field Khasra No. 4808. They commenced the suit for a declaration of a right of way over the land Khasra No. 4799, belonging to the defendant, Haroo. They claimed this right founded on prescription.3. The defendant denied this right and resisted the suit mainly on the ground that no right of way was either granted or came into existence by long user.4. This suit was brought on 17th January 1946. This date is important because it is previous to the date when certain enactments wera put in force in Jubbal State. On 17th September 1946, it is admitted by the parties that the Limitation ...

Tag this Judgment!


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