Himachal Pradesh Court July 1950 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.
Sadh Vs. Panu and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-13-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP49
Bannerji, J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment & decree, dated 25-7-1949, of the Dist. J. reversing a judgment & decree dated 27-11-1948, of the Senior Subordinate Judge, with the result that the pltf's suit was dismissed.2. The pltf, Sadh, commenced the action by a plaint, dated 7-7-1948, alleging that in Savan 2002, corresponding to July 1945 he had sold two pack-mulea & potato-crops of two fields to the defts for Rs. 3000. (Rupees three thousand) & allowed him credit till Poh for payment. The defts. made payments from time to time & at the time of the action, a balance of Rs. 750 (Rupees seven hundred and fifty) was still due from them.3. The defts, Panu & Rela, two brothers, resistedthe suit on the ground that the purchase was madein Savan 2001 & not in Savan 9002, as alleged inthe plaint & that they had paid the price in fullthat had been settled between them.4. On 3-8-1948, the deft. Panu's statement was recorded. He stated that the price was fixed at Rs. 2,000 & he had paid R...
Prem Nath Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-12-1950
Reported in: 1951CriLJ14
Harnam Singh, J.1. Prem Nath son of Tulsi Ram was convicted under Section 420, Penal Code, in the Court of Special Railway Magistrate, Atubala Cantonment on 3l-10 1949, and was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months. On 8-12-1949, he was surrendered to the Patiala and Bast Punjab States Union to stand his trial in the Court of the Additional District; Magistrate Faridkot. He was kept in the District Jail, Faridkot, between 10-12-1949 and 16-5.1960, and re* surrendered to (he Jail authorities in the Punjab State on 17-5-1960.2. Prem Nath, now applies to this Court that the period between 8-12-1949, to 16-5-1950 should be taken into account in determining whether he has served the period of imprisonment imposed upon him by the Special Railway Magistrate, Ambala Cantonment on 31-10-1949.3. In these proceedings no one has appeared on behalf of the prisoner.4. Mr. Harbans Singh Gujral who appears for the State maintains that the case falls under Section 11 (2), Extradition Act, 1...
Bakhtawar Singh Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-04-1950
Reported in: 1951CriLJ17
Falshaw, J.1. This judgment will deal with five petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 491, Criminal P.C., filed by relatives on behalf of Kirpal Singh son of Mota Singh of Rangarh, Kirpal Singh son of Jalmeja Singh of Burj, Ajit Singh of Khem Karan, Mangal Singh of Chhina Bidhi Chand and Kartar Singh of the same village. All these villages are in the district of Amritsar, and all the detenus except Kirpal Singh son of Mota Singh, who was arrested on 1st June, were arrested on 2-6-1950 under the orders of the District Magistrate of Amritsar, under the provisions of Section 3, Preventive Detention Act, 1950, the District Magistrate further ordering the detention of all of them for a period of two months, which in the case of Kirpal Singh son of Mota Singh was up to 31-8-1950 and in the case of the others up to 1-9-1950. In each case the order of detention specified that the detenu was to be committed to the custody of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Am...
Karam Singh Vs. State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP19
Bannerji, J.1. The appellant, Karam Singh, and his brother, lambardar Lehna Singh, were sent up for trial before the Additional Sessions Judge under the following charges; namely, Section 120-B; Sections 302, 447, 364, 436 and 896, Penal Code, read with Section 149, Penal Code.2. The assessors were of opinion that the appellant, Karam Singh, had committed nocrime and they unanimously declared him innocent. Agreeing with the views of the assessors, the learned Judge acquitted the appellant of the five charges but disagreeing with the views of the assessors, he convicted the appellant under Section 302, read with Section 34, Penal Code, for the murder of Habib. The original charge was as follows:'That on 31st Bhadon Section 2004 B. you, in order to achieve the aforesaid common object, formed an unlawful assembly with the accused Karam Singh and other persons mentioned above, and while the rest with the guna, swords, etc., were sent down by you to Sandur, you along with your brother Karam...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›