Himachal Pradesh Court August 1954 Judgments

Jiwanand and anr. Vs. Ram Kishan and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1955HP1

ORDERRamabhadran, J.C.1. These are three connected revision petitions, which arise out of three suits, numbered 41/1, 196/1 and 205/1 of 1953, pertaining to the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Mahasu. At the instance of the parties, the three suits were referred to arbitration. The arbitrators submitted their award to the Court on 8-1-1954. parties were given time till 19-2-1954 to file objection, if any, to the awards. No objections were preferred and, thereupon, the learned Senior Subordinate Judge passed decrees in terms of the awards. It is against these decrees that these revision petitions have been filed.2. Yesterday, I heard learned counsel for the petitioners. I called upon him to show how these revision petitions were competent, in view of the fact that the petitioners filed no objections to the awards in spite of the fact that they were given an opportunity to do so. To this, learned counsel replied that the petitioners' counsel was absent at that stage and, consequen...

Mast Ram Vs. Basant Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1955CriLJ697

ORDERRamabhadran, J.C. 1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu, wherein he has recommended that the order of the Magistrate First Class, Solan, acquitting the opposite party, Basant Ram, of an offence under Sections 323 and 504, I. P. C., be set aside and the case sent back for retrial. The reference arises under the following circumstances.2. There were two connected cases before the Magistrate First Class, Solan. (1) 'State v. Mast Ram and two others', under Sections 354 and 457, I. P. C. The allegations in that case were that the accused persons broke into the house of one Mt. Dharmi in village Nahri and they outraged her modesty. (2) A complaint filed by Mast Ram against Basant Ram, as already stated, under Sections 323 and 504, I. P. C., with the allegations that the accused gave him three blows with a 'danda'.3. The former case ended in conviction. The convicted persons went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge of Mahasu, who set aside their conviction and or...

Shobhanu Vs. Kishnu and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP86

ORDERRamabhadran, J.C.1. The petitioner, Shobhanu, filed a complaint under Section 366, I. P. C., against the respondents, alleging that they had abducted his wife, Mt. Achari, for purposes of illicit intercourse. The learned trial Magistrate found that Mt. Achari went to the accused of her own free will. Consequently, in his opinion, the element of abduction was absent. As regards the other offence, namely, that committed by Kishnu in detaining Mt. Achari for purposes of illicit intercourse, the Magistrate pointed out that the detention was in a village in Pepsu, which was outside his jurisdiction. He, therefore, discharged the accused persons and left it open to the complainant to seek his remedy, if any, in Pepsu Courts. Against that order of discharge, Shobhanu went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu, but he was unsuccessful there.He then came in revision to this Court. The revision petition was fixed for 14-7-1954 for preliminary hearing. At the express request...

Bansi Lal and ors. Vs. Mohi Ram and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1955HP2

Ramabhadran, J.C.1. This second appeal by the defendants arises under the following circumstances. Mohi Ram and others filed a suit against Bansi Lal and others, alleging that the suit lands were purchased in 1950 S. for Rs. 155/8/- out of funds contributed by the villagers of Sangra. For the sake of convenience, the name of Dhian Singh alone was entered over it as 'Benamidar'. After the death of Dhian Singh, the defendants continued to hold the property in the same capacity, i.e., as 'Benamidars'. The plaintiffs alleged that they had been in possession of the land, since its purchase, and had been grazing their cattle there and collecting fuel therefrom. At the time of the settlement, Dhian Singh managed to get the land entered in his exclusive name by misrepresenting facts.In Jeth 2006 S., the defendants prevented the plaintiffs from grazing their cattle on this land. In Asar 2007, the defendants further seized the plaintiffs' cattle and impounded them and also filed a complaint agai...

Lagnu and anr. Vs. Mt. Surmi and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1955HP8

ORDERRamabhadran, J.C. 1. This revision petition arises out of an order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Theog, disallowing an application for amendment of the plaint under Order 6, Rule 17, Civil P. Code. The petitioners filed a suit, in the first instance, against Mt. Surmi, respondent 1, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Theog, claiming that, as reversioners of Bairagi, deceased husband of Surmi, they were entitled to succeed to the ancestral properties left by Bairagi, after the death of Mt. Surmi. They alleged that Mt. Surmi was intending to alienate the aforesaid properties in favour of her daughter, Mt. Bishni. They, therefore, sought a declaration to the effect that they were the reversioners of Bairagi and were entitled to succeed to the ancestral properties on the death of Mt. Surmi. They further prayed for a perpetual injunction restraining Mt. Surmi from alienating the aforesaid properties.2. The suit was contested by Mt. Surmi on the ground that half the properties ha...

Raghunath and ors. Vs. Khindu

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1955CriLJ265

ORDERRamabhadran, J.C. 1. The respondent, Khindu, filed a petition under Section 145, Criminal P. C., against the present petitioners in the Court of the Magistrate first class, Theog, alleging that he and his uncles had been in possession of the disputed land and were forcibly dispossessed by the present petitioners between April and June 1952 (the petition, was filed on 23-6-1952). Khindu asked for action under Section 145, Criminal P. C. The Magistrate, after making an inquiry, came to the conclusion that Khindu was in possession in Jeth 2009 B. and had been forcibly dispossessed by the present petitioners. Accordingly, he directed that Khindube put back in possession of the land. He further directed that the petitioners should hand over 30 maunds of maize to Khindu, or in lieu thereof, Rs. 400/- in cash. Against this order, the petitioners went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu, but their revision petition was rejected. Hence, this revision petition to this Cou...

Sant Ram and ors. Vs. Paras Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Ramabhadran, J.C.1. The plaintiffs-appellants filed a suit in the Court of the District Judge, Mahasu, against the respondent for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 14,600/-. Therein, the defendant was shown as a resident of village Kyartoo, Tehsil Theog, District Mahasu. The suit was resisted, 'inter alia', on the ground that the defendant was & resident of village Ambota in district Hoshiarpur, Punjab, and he did not reside or carry on business within the jurisdiction of the District Judge, Mahasu. A preliminary issue on this point was framed and parties led evidence upon it. The learned District Judge (Mr. Chet Ram) upheld the defendant's contention and directed that the plaint be returned for presentation to the proper Court. Hence, this appeal by the plaintiffs. 2. Under Section 20, Civil P. C., every suit shall be instituted in a Court, within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, the defendant actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain. In...