Himachal Pradesh Court December 1955 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.
Mussadi Vs. Mt. Chando and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-1955
Reported in: AIR1956HP45
ORDER10. The result is: I allow this appeal, set aside the decisions of the Courts below and grant the plaintiff a declaratory decree as prayed for. In view of the fact that Mt. Chando was at one time married to the plaintiff's own brother, I leave parties to bear their respective costs here and in the Courts below....
Sada Ram and anr. Vs. Chhotu Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-23-1955
Reported in: AIR1957HP26
Ramabhadran, J.C.1. In this appeal by two employers against an order awarding compensation by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, Bilaspur, learned counsel for the workman-respondent urged, at the hearing on 20-12-55 that the appeal was incompetent, because the amount of compensation was deposited with the Commissioner, after the expiry of the period of limitation for filing an appeal.2. In answer to that objection, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, accompanied by an affidavit, was put in on behalf of the appellants soon afterwards. A further affidavit was filed on the 21st instant by Bhagat Ram, appellant. A reply to the application was filed by the respondent yesterday.3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and, in my opinion, for reasons to be stated shortly, no case is made out for condoning the delay in depositing the amount of compensation with the Commissioner and since the deposit was made after the expiry of the period of limitat...
Ganga Ram Vs. the State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1956HP43,1956CriLJ996
ORDERRamabhadran, J.C. 1. The petitioner was hauled up by the S. H. O. Solan under Section 109, Criminal P. G., and put up before the Magistrate first class, Solan, who bound him over to be of good behaviour for six months. In default of furnishing security, the Magistrate directed the petitioner to undergo six months' simple imprisonment.2. The petitioner went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge, but was unsuccessful. He has now come up in revision to this Court.3. After going through the judgments of the Courts below, I admitted this petition on the 24th Ultimo on the ground that the evidence on the record did not fulfil the requirements of Section 109, Criminal P. C.4. To-day, I have heard learned counsel for the respondent and gone through the record. For reasons to be stated presently, I am of the opinion that the order, binding down the petitioner, cannot be maintained.5. The prosecution case was that on 6-4-1955 at 10.30 A. M. in the Ganj Bazar at Solan, a police party, consistin...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›