Himachal Pradesh Court July 1952 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.
Munshi Ram and anr. Vs. Raghubir Chand
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-31-1952
Reported in: AIR1953HP15
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is a defendants' first appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 8,838/8/3 as price of potatoes, which was decreed by the Senior Subordinate Judge of Mahasu on 2-5-1951 for Rs. 4,496/5/-. Under paragraph 31 of the Himachal Pradesh (Courts) Order, 1948, the appeal being from a decree of a Subordinate Judge in a suit, of value exceeding Rs. 5,000/-, it should have been filed in this Court. And the 90-day period of limitation for such an appeal under Article 156 of the Limitation Act, after allowing for the twenty-two days taken by the defendants-appellants in obtaining the necessary copies, expired on 22-8-1953. The present appeal was, however, filed two days too late, i.e., on 24-8-1951. The preliminary question for determination before me at this stage is whether the appeal should be dismissed as time-barred.2. There is an application for condonation of delay on behalf of the defendants-appellants under Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act. In order to ...
Kirpa and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1952
Reported in: AIR1952HP68
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. Haria and Kirpa were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Mahasu and Sirmur for having committed criminal trespass into the house of an old man aged 77, named Panu, in village Dilli, tehsil Theog, on the night between 4th and 5th of May 1948, murdered him and committed robbery of his ornaments and household effects. They were acquitted of the charge of murder but convicted of the offences in respect of the other two charges under Section 394 and the second part of Section 451, Penal Code. Each of them has been sentenced to transportation for life and a fine of Rs. 300, or further two years' rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine, under the former section, and to three years, rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200, or one year's further rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine, under the latter, the sentences running concurrently. Both have appealed to this Court.2. The case presents certain special features the adverse bearing...
Mela Ram Vs. Mt. Pratibha Devi
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1953HP4
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. The case is at the stage of admission, and there is an office report that the court-fee paid is deficient. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and am of the opinion that the court-fee paid is deficient.2. This was a suit for possession of a plot of land along with certain constructions put up thereon by the defendant and for recovery of Rs. 438 as mesne profits. On an objection raised in the trial Court by the defendant, the value of the property in suit was determined. It was found that the market-value of the land (which fell in the category of land described in Clause (d) of para (v) of Section 7 of the Court Fees Act) was Rs. 900 and that of the building Rs. 1,750. The plaintiff was therefore made to pay a court-fee on the total of these two figures and the said mesne profits, i.e. on Rs. 3,088 in all. The suit was decreed for possession of the land and for recovery of Rs. 146-2-0 as mesne profits, and the defendant was allowed to remove the superst...
Dr. Jagat Ram Sud Vs. the State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1953HP5
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is an appeal by one Dr. Jagat Ram Sud, hereinafter referred to as the claimant, under Section 5(1)(f) of the East Punjab Requisitioning of Immovable Property (Temporary Powers) Act (XLVIII of 1948).2. A three storeyed building, situate in Sanjauli, Simla known as the Jagat Niwas, consisting of two shops in the ground floor and two residential sets in each of the two floors above, was requisitioned by the Himachal Pradesh Government under Section 2(1) of the said Act on 1-8-1949 for the Himachal Government Transport. The claimant was actually dispossessed of the building on 8-9-1949. The building was derequisitioned by an order dated 25-1-1950 but possession was actually restored to the claimant on 31-1-1950. The building was thus in possession of the Himachal Pradesh Government for four months and twenty three days from 8-9-1949 to 31-1-1950.3. As the amount of compensation could not be fixed by agreement, Sri H. L. Soni, District and Sessions Judge Mahasu and Si...
Guddumal and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-02-1952
Reported in: AIR1953HP38
Chowdhry, J.C.1. This is an application in revision by Guddumal and Thuniamal against anorder of Sri Devaki Nandan Magistrate firstclass Kasumpti, dated 24-7-1951, passed in thefollowing circumstances.2. One Amichand sued the petitioners on 30-11-1946 for recovery of a loan in the Court of the District Judge of Koti. The petitioners pleaded full satisfaction and filed a receipt in support of the contention. The District Judge decreed the suit on 29-6-1948, holding the receipt to be a forgery. The petitioners filed an appeal against the decree on 30-9-1948 before the Judicial Commissioner. Dr. J. N. Bannerji, Judicial Commissioner, who also exercised powers as a Judicial Committee., acting under a notification of the Chief Commissioner dated 14-1-1949, converted the appeal into an appeal to the Judicial Committee on 17-5-1949 and decided it as such on 24-5-1949, recommending to the Chief Commissioner that the appeal be dismissed and the petitioners prosecuted for filing a forged receipt...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›