Himachal Pradesh Court May 1953 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.
Sabhu and ors. Vs. Ramsa and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1953HP123
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a plaintiffs' application in revision against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Theog dated 13-10-1952 whereby the plaintiffs were directed to file an amended plaint impleading the State of Himachal Pradesh as a defendant. This order was passed after the disposal of the preliminary issue whether the said State was a necessary party to the suit. The Court held that the State was a necessary party.2. There are two preliminary objections raised by the learned counsel for the defendants-respondents. The first is that the plaintiffs are estopped from filing their revision because of an application which they filed on 23-10-1952 for extension of time to file the amended plaint in accordance with the aforesaid finding. There is no doubt that extension of time was in fact prayed for by the plaintiffs, but I do not think that by reason merely of having put in such an application the plaintiffs would be estopped from coming up in revision against the order...
R.N. Mohindra Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1953HP125
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by one B. N. Mohindra, one time employee of the respondent, the State of Himachal Pradesh, in the medical department, whose services were terminated by an order of the Director of Health Services dated 26-3-1951, for a writ of mandamus and such other directions as may be deemed fit to the respondent for restoration of the petitioner to the office of the Head Clerk in the medical department of the State and for payment to him of arrears of his emoluments till the date of his reinstatement. The application has been opposed on behalf of the State.2. It appears that the petitioner was appointed a Head/ Clerk in the medical department of the former Sirmur State on six months probation in June 1944 and confirmed on that post on 6-3-1945. After formation of Himachal Pradesh, which took place on 15-4-1948, the petitioner's services were continued in the medical department by the respondent. One of the points urged b...
Satya Dev Bushehari Vs. Ghanshiam
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1953HP117
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is an application in revision against the order of the Magistrate first class Kasumpti, dated 11-3-1953, taking cognizance of a complaint filed against the petitioner by the respondent. The offences alleged against the petitioner are forgery under Section 465 and using as genuine a forged document under Section 471, I. P. C., in respect of a nomination paper filed by him be-fore the Returning Officer on 12-10-1951 under Section 33 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. There was a quadrangular fight to fill a seat in the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly from the Rajgarh constituency, the present petitioner Satya Dev Bushahari and respondent Ghanshiam being two of the contestants. The nomination paper delivered by the petitioner to the Returning Officer on 12-10-1951 mentioned one Sudarshan Das as the proposer. On 17-10-1951, the date fixed for the scrutiny of nominations, it was objected that the signature of Sudarshan Das on the nomination paper had...
Kanshi Ram Vs. Mt. Dharmi and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1953HP102
ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a plaintiff's application for setting aside the order of this Court dated 2-9-1962 dismissing his revision petition for default of prosecution. 2. The defendants in the case are Mt. Dharmi and Balak Ram. It appears that Sri Man Mohan Nath Advocate appeared for Balak Ram on 20-8-1952 but the other defendant Mt. Dharmi was absent and she had not been served. The case was therefore adjourned and the plaintiff-petitioner was ordered to take fresh steps against Mt. Dharmi within a week. Steps were however not taken despite a reminder, and, as stated, the revision was dismissed for default on 2-9-1952. The present petition for setting aside the order of dismissal and restoration of the revision was filed on behalf of the plaintiff on 3-10-1952.3. There were two preliminary objections taken by the learned counsel for the defendants-respondents: (1) that an application tor restoration of revision dismissed for default does not lie, and (2) that the application for...
Devi Das Vs. Bushahr Sangh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-18-1953
Reported in: AIR1953HP110
Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is a first appeal by the plaintiff Devi Das Mahajan against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Rampur Bushahr, dated 28-12-1950, whereby his suit as agent for rendition of accounts and recovery of Rs. 100/-, or whatever be found due on the taking of accounts, was dismissed, and a decree for Rs. 22,081/-/6 was passed against him and in favour of the principal, the defendant Co-operative Society known as the Bushahr Sangh of Rampur.2. The appeal, filed on 31-7-1951, being prima facie time barred under Article 156, Limitation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which prescribes a period of 90 days from the date of the decree appealed from, the plaintiff-appellant filed along with the appeal an application for extension of period under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Act. It appears that well within the 30-days period prescribed under Article 152 of the Act the plaintiff filed an appeal against the aforesaid judgment and decree in...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›