Himachal Pradesh Court July 1949 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Jaban Das Vs. Ganga Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-1949
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,...
Koti Darbar Vs. Ram Chand
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-1949
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...
Haroo Vs. Man Dass and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-07-1949
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 ...
Rattan Das and ors. Vs. Darshan Dass and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1949
Reported in: AIR1950HP15
Bannerji, J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the District Judge, Rampur, dated 18-4-2005 B., affirming a judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Chini, dated 12-7-2003 and thereby dismissing the plaintiffs suit. 2. The suit, in which this appeal hag arisen, was brought by Rattan Das and others, who are the appellants against (1) Darshan Das, (2) Jagar Nath, (3) Jheru, (4) Padam Das and (5) Meo Ram, who are respondents to this appeal. There has been no appearance for the respondents, Padam Das and Meo Ram, in this appeal. 3. The suit was for a declaration that the revenue entries by mutation No. 280 on the basis of an alleged gift of one-fourth share of 44 Khasra numbers measuring 188 bighas and 19 biswas (one hundred and eighty-eight bighas and nineteen biswas) in Chak Karoli be declared not to affect the shares of the members of the joint family, constituting the appellants and respondents. 4. Nainsukh (who died without a male issue), Premsukh (whose sons are ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›