Himachal Pradesh Court March 1961 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.
Balu Ram Vs. Dhangal Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1961
Reported in: AIR1961HP44
ORDERC.B. Capoor, J.C.1. This application in revision by the defendant is directed against an appellate judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Mandi and Chamba districts, affirming a decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge Karsog for recovery of Rs. 735/- on foot of a promissory note dated 1-1-1959 executed by the petitioner for a consideration of Rs. 684/-. A receipt Ex. P. B was also executed by the petitioner contemporaneously with the execution of the pronote.2. The petitioner admitted the execution of the pronote but denied having received the sum of Rs. 684/- in cash. His case was that the pronote. was executed in lieu of past transactions. 3. The learned Subordinate Judge decreed the suit. An appeal was filed by the petitioner in the Court of the District Judge and in support of it an argument was advanced that the pronote in suit was insufficiently stamped and as such was inadmissible in evidence and no decree could have been passed on its basis. While the le...
Chandu Ram and anr. Vs. Kalyan Chand and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1961
Reported in: AIR1961HP38
C.B. Capoor, J.C.1. This is a defendants second appeal and is directed against a judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Alandi and Chamba districts.2. The appellants Chandu Ram and Nandu Ram had instituted a suit for recovery of possession of 35 bighas 18 biswas 5 biswansis land by redemption of a usufructuary mortgage made by their predecessors-in-title in 1898 B. to secure a sum of Rs. 3,000/-. Kalyan Chand, Pratap Chand and Prakash Chand, some of the representatives-in-interest of the mortgagees, were impleaded to that suit and as Kalyan Chand and Pratap Chand wereminors their brother Prakash Chand was appointed their guardian ad litem.A compromise was effected in that suit. Shri Mohinder Lal Advocate was appointed as a counsel by the aforesaid Prakash Chand on his behalf as also on behalf of the minors and an application for premission to enter into compromise was submitted to the Court by the aforesaid advocate. The requisite permission was granted and in accordance wi...
Collector of Bilaspur Vs. Santu and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-1961
Reported in: AIR1962HP16
ORDERC.B. Capoor, J.C.1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act for condonation of delay in the preferment of miscellaneous First Appeal No. 14 of 1960. Applications for condonation of delay in the filing of Miscellaneous First Appeals Nos. 29 and 30 of 1960 have also been filed and for the sate of convenience, I propose to dispose of the three applications by this order.2. The order of the learned Additional District Judge which has given rise to Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 14 of 1960, was announced on 80-11-1959. An application for obtaining a copy of the order was made on 16-12-1959 and was furnished to the appellants on 31-12-1959. The period of limitation for the filing of the appeal expired on 6-3-1960 which was a Sunday. The appeal was filed on 8-3-1960. It has been alleged in the affidavit filed along with the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act that on receiving the copy of the order of the Court the Collector examined fee Merits '...
Collector Vs. Smt. Janki Devi
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1961
Reported in: AIR1961HP42
C.B. Capoor, J.C.1. This appeal by the Collector, Bilaspur is directed against an order of Shri Chet Ram, the learned Additional District Judge Bilaspur, whereby on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act the respondent was awarded a sum ot Rs. 540/- as compensation for loss of earnings.2. No compensation was awarded to the respondent by the learned Collector. The learned Additional District Judge determined the net monthly income of the respondent at Rs. 45/- and awarded such income for a period of one year as compensation. 3. The first contention that has been urged on behalf of the appellant is that the learned Court erred in fixing the income of the respondent at Rs. 3/- per day and in support of that contention reliance was placed upon the statement made by the respondent herself to the effect that her daily income varied from Rs. 2/- to Rs. 2/8/-. There is no doubt that in the face of the aforesaid statement the learned Court should not have determined the daily ...
The Collector Vs. Smt. Ram Devi
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-08-1961
Reported in: AIR1961HP40
C.B. Capoor, J.C.1. This appeal by the Collector, Bilaspur, is directed against an order of the Additional District Judge, Bilaspur, whereby on a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act', a sum of Rs. 540/- was awarded as compensation for loss of earnings to the respondent.2. No compensation for loss of earnings was awarded to the respondent by the Collector. The reference made at the instance of the respondent was opposed by the Collector on the grounds that the respondent did not carry on any business in house No. 48 at the relevant time and that in any case the amount of compensation calimed was excessive. No 'evidence was, however, led on behalf of the Collector in support of his case.The respondent besides hereself examined four witnesses, namely Kishan Singh, Paras Ram, Sant Ram and Ram Kishan and on that evidence the Court held that the respondent did carry on the profession of a tailor in her house No. 48 which admitte...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›