Himachal Pradesh Court December 1951 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.
Wazir Chand and anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-26-1951
Reported in: AIR1952HP35
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. These are two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, one filed on 21-8-1951 by Wazir Chand and R. S. Sharma against the State of Himachal Pradesh, the District Magistrate of Chamba and the Station House Officer Kotwali Chamba, and the other by the former alone on 20-9-1951 against the first two of the three respondents mentioned above, against the seizure at Chamba of certain medicinal herbs, alleged to be worth about Rs. 47,000/-, by the Jammu and Kashmir police with the help of the Chamba police. The reliefs prayed for, and the grounds on which those reliefs are based, will appear from the following.2. There is a firm styled the Kashmir Woods with Prabhu, Dayal, Trilok Nath and Gauri Shankar as its partners and its head office at Jammu, which carries on timber business in the Jammu and Kashmir State. On 4-3-1951 the two partners Prabhu Dayal and Gauri Shankar lodged a report with the police at Jammu against the third partner Trilok Nath and tw...
Dhumun Vs. Ram Dayal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-11-1951
Reported in: AIR1952HP63
Chowdhry, J.C.1. This is a defendant's application in revision against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Chamba dated 4-4-1950 under Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. Code, rejecting his application to set aside the ex parte decree that had been passed against him on 8-7-1948 in favour of the plaintiff-respondent in a preemption suit. 2. The learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent took two preliminary objections. The first was that the present revision, which was filed on 15-1-1951, was time barred under the ninety-day rule of limitation laid down by this Court in 'BEG RAM v. CHARAN DAS', AIR 1951 Him. P. 16. That ruling was however published in the January 1951 issue of the A. I. Rule and therefore published too late for the defendant-petitioner being penalised for not having followed it. Nor would it be justifiable to reject the application on the ground of latches because after the rejection of his application under Order 9, Rule 13, the petitioner filed within limitation an ...
The State Vs. Shanti Dutt and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1952HP61
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is a Government appeal against the acquittal of Shanti Dutt, Amin Chand and Tokha by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Chamba on their appeal against conviction by a learned first class Magistrate under Section 61 (1) (a) of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, for an offence punishable under Section 24 (4) of that Act and Rule 10. 23 of the Punjab Import, Export, Transport, and Possession Rules. The first two were convicted as actual offenders and the last vicariously under Section 77 of the said Act. The offence consisted in possession of country liquor in excess of the limit of retail sale, viz., in excess of one bottle.2. Shanti Dutt and Amin Chand are both residents of Chamba town, while Tokha is a resident of Himgiri, about 36 miles from Chamba, where he holds a licence for retail sale of liquor. The facts, which are not in dispute, are these. Tokha used to get his supply of country liquor from the wholesale dealer at Chamba, one Sanji Ram, through Amin Chan...
Naurang and anr. Vs. Janta
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-08-1951
Reported in: AIR1952HP27
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. The petitioners Naurang and Nanda were convicted by a second class Magistrate for an offence under Section 447, I. P. C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25/- each or 20 days' simple imprisonment in default. Their appeal was dismissed by the learned District Magistrate of Chamba on 3-5-1951, and now they have coma up in revision to this Court.2. The learned counsel for the petitioners challenged the finding of fact as to the land in question having been in possession of the complainant Janta. A concurrent finding of fact has, however, been recorded by both the Courts below on that point, and, as the only ground urged in this connection was that on a proper appraisal of the oral and documentary evidence on the record a different finding should have been arrived at, there is no justification for interference with that finding.3. Nor is there any force in the contention that the alleged act of the petitioners amounted merely to a civil as distinguished from a criminal...
Lalla Ram Vs. Naresh Chand and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-07-1951
Reported in: AIR1952HP28
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a defendant's application for revision of the judgment and decree dated 11-6-1951 of the learned District Judge of Mahasu and Sirmur.2. The plaintiff-respondent filed two suits on one and the same date, 27-9-1950, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Solan for recovery of sums of money due as arrears of rent in respect of a shop, one for Rs. 125/- for the period 1-1-1948 to 31-12-1948, and the other for Rs. 500/-for the period 1-1-1949 to 31-12-1950, at Rs. 250/-per annum, on foot of an agreement dated 22-3-1948. The former was registered as suit No. 87/1 and the latter as suit No. 88/1 of 1950 in the Register of Civil Suits of that Court. During the pendency of the two suits the defendants, the tenants of the shop, filed an application before the Controller for determination of fair rent of the shop under Section 4 of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (III (3) of 1949), and the suits were stayed. The Controller decided the tenants' aforesaid ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›