Himachal Pradesh Court May 1954 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.
Mela Ram and ors. Vs. Amar Nath and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1954HP65
ORDER1. This is an application under Order 22 Rule 4, C. P. C., and it is supported by a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and an affidavit. The application arises under the following circumstances. On 30-12-1952, the learned District Judge of Mandi and Chamba dismissed a suit brought by Mela Bam and others against Kanhya Lal and others. Kanhya Lal, defendant aforesaid, died on 26-1-1953, leaving two sons, Amar Nath and Jagan Nath. On 2-4-1953, an appeal was presented by Mela Bam and others against the judgment and decree of the District Judge. Since Kanhya Lal was dead, his sons, Amar Nath and Jagan Nath, were impleaded as respondents 1 and 2 in the memorandum of appeal. At the foot of the memorandum of appeal, a note was made that since Kanhya Lal, defendant, had died on 26-1-1953, his sons (who were his legal representatives) were impleaded as respondents 1 and 2. An office objection was raised to the impleading of Amar Nath and Jagan Nath without an application. In ans...
Shridhar Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-07-1954
Reported in: AIR1954HP67
ORDERRamabhadran, J.C. 1. The facts giving rise to this revision petition are that Piar Singh, son of the petitioner, committed suicide on 11th Jeth 2009 B. by shooting himself with the gun belonging to one Jai Kishan in the field of one Baldev near village Seri. The dead body was cremated the next day without giving information to the police. In due course, a complaint under Sections 176 and 202, I. P. C., was filed by S. H. O. Kihar against six persons, including the petitioner and Jai Kishan. The trial Magistrate convicted the petitioner and Jai Kishan under Section 202, I. P. C., and acquitted the remaining accused persons. Shridhar (the petitioner) filed an appeal, which was heard and disposed of by the learned District Magistrate of Chamba. The learned District Magistrate altered the conviction of the petitioner from one under Section 202, I. P. C., to one under Section 176, I. P. C., but maintained the sentence. Hence, this revision petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitione...
Magna and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1954HP68
Ramabhadran, J.C.1. Magna, petitioner 1, was prosecuted of offences punishable under Sections 224 and 353, I. P. C., and the remaining petitioners of offences under Sections 225 and 353, I. P. C., in the Court of the Magistrate second class, Churah. The trial Magistrate convicted petitioners 1 to 4 of the offences with which they had been charged. Petitioners 5 to 7 were acquitted of the charge under Section 353, I. P. C., but convicted under Section 225, I. P. C. They preferred an appeal to the learned District Magistrate of Chamba, who, however, rejected it. They have now come up in revision to this Court.2. The prosecution case was that in pursuance of a warrant, Ex. P. A, issued by Sri Devendra Nath, Magistrate first class, Chamba, constables, Gulabu and Chuhru, proceeded to village Galwa and attempted to apprehend petitioner Magna. The petitioners, however, used criminal force against the constables and obstructed the lawful apprehension of Magna with the result that he could not ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›