Himachal Pradesh Court May 1971 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.
Rattan Chand Etc. Vs. Smt. Sharab Chhozam
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-31-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP87
D.B. Lal, J.1. This is plaintiff's second appeal and arises out of a judgment and decree dated 6th May. 1967 of the District Judge, Kinnaur. The plaintiffs Rattan Chand and another came to Court with the allegations, that one Girdhari Lal, who is husband of the defendant Sharab Chhozam, was the owner of a three-storeyed house situate in 'shamlat' Khasra No. 617/1 of village Chini in the Tehsil of Kalpa. Girdhari Lal had constructed this house after purchasing the land from 'shamlat'. He sold the said house to the plaintiffs on 12-1-1961 and he executed the sale-deed (Ex. PD) in favour of the plaintiffs. The house is actually in the occupation of tenants who were made defendants 2 to 4 In the suit. It was alleged that the defendant Sharab Chhozan has denied the title of the plaintiffs and the tenant-defendants 2 to 4 are paying rent to her. As such the suit was filed for a declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners of the house and for possession with a direction that the defendants...
Smt. Raj Kumari Suri Vs. Prem Lal Dhiman
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-28-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP67
ORDERD.B. Lal, J.1. This as an application in revision under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code and has been directed against an order D/- 12-1-1971 of the District Judge, Simla whereby he has modified a certain order of injunction issued at interim stage by the Senior Sub-Judge of Simla. The facts leading to the petition are as follows.2. The plaintiff Shrimati Raj Kumari Suri appeared in Court with the allegations that the defendant Shri Prem Lal Dhiman is constructing a house over a plot of land sold to him by her, but he is also utilising the main passage beyond the point 'AB' leading to her own building and the court premises, shown in her site plan and that the defendant should be prohibited from using this main passage. It was further contended, that the defendant is constructing a wall towards the main passage beyond the point 'AB' and he has opened doors, windows and ventilators in this wall to which he is not entitled. Accordingly the suit was filed for prohibitory injun...
Dhian Singh and anr. Vs. Collector
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-25-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP24
ORDERD.B. Lal, J.1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India whereby an order of the Collector. Mahasu has been challenged, which is to the effect that the disputed land comprised in Khasra No. 397-min, measuring 7 biswas, situate in mauza Tharola. Pargana Chohar. Sub-Tehsil Kotkhai should be sold by auction. The brief facts leading to the petition may now be stated.2. It is contended that one GOPU was in cultivatory possession of the disputed land and the petitioners Dhian Singh and Amar Sinah are his brothers entitled to succeed him. Upon the death of Gopu certain persons of the village who were interested in his land, made complaints to the Collector that the petitioners were trying to usurp possession over the land and the said Collector, who is Revenue Officer presumably under Section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act), considered that the land has been encroached upon by the petitioners and as such t...
Ram SaIn and ors. Vs. Bhagirath and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-24-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP65
D.B. Lal, J.1. This appeal of Shri Ram Sain and five others, has been directed against the judgment dated 10-10-1969 of the District Judge, Kinnaur. The plaintiff Bhagirath came to Court with the allegations, that he was joint-owner of Khasra No. 466 situate at 'chak' Telengi, Tehsil Kalpa, along with the defendant No. 2 Mansa Ram. The latter sold the entire land to one Nazor. It was stated that the sale of the entire land could not be effected because Mansa Ram owned and possessed one-half share in it. It was further contended that due to certain custom prevailing amongst the tribals, to which the parties belong, Mansa Ram could not dispose of even his own share in the land. It was also pleaded that subsequently Mansa Ram paid back the consideration to Nazor, but he did not return back the land. Hence, the suit was filed for a declaration that the sale was invalid and that the possession of Nazor was illegal.2. The defendants contested the suit on the allegations, that no such custom ...
Smt. Rani Sarla Devi Vs. Nasib Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP18
D.B. Lal, J.1. This is defendant's second appeal and is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9th May, 1968 of the District Judge, Kangra.The plaintiff Nasib Singh came to Court with the allegations, that he was tenant in possession of 16 Kanals, 16 Marias of land described in the plaint under the landlords Subhash Chander and Jaipal. The said landlords sold the disputed land to Rani Sarla, defendant, at a consideration of Rs. 3500/-. The purchaser approached the plaintiff to give up possession. An agreement was reached on 31-12-60 to the effect that Rani Sarla would sell 4 Kanals out of the land to the plaintiff at a consideration of Rs. 200/- and the plaintiff would retain possession over this part of the land and would give up possession for the remaining part. The agreement was executed on 31-12-1960 and the plaintiff having paid Rupees 200/- to Rani Sarla, surrendered possession for the remaining part of the land and retained possession over 4 Kanals. The mutation entries...
Lachhi and ors. Vs. Ghansara Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP89
D.B. Lal, J.1. This second appeal filed by the plaintiffs arises out of the judgment and decree dated 30th April, 1968 of the District Judge, Dharamsala. Lachhi Ram and five others who are the plaintiffs, came to Court with the allegations, that Ghansara Singh and two others who are the defendants, being proprietors of Khasra Nos. 1025 and 1048 of Tikka Andreta of Palampur Tehsil, have erected a hedging so that their cattle which used to graze over the disputed land, have been stopped from going there. The plaintiffs based their claim on the allegations, that they as well as their ancestors have been using the disputed land for pasturage and their cattle used to go there and rest for the day. It was only recently that the defendants created the obstruction and hence the plaintiffs claimed for a declaration that they had acquired a right of pasturage and that a permanent injuncion is also to be granted in their favour and against the defendants, restraining the latter from interfering i...
Smt. Chinti W/O Daya Ram Vs. Tarlok Chand and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-17-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP91
Chet Ram Thakur, J.1. In this appeal by the tenant against the order of the learned District Judge, Mahasu, dismissing her appeal against the order of the Compensation Officer the only point that falls for determination is whether the relationship of landlord and tenant comes to an end as soon as the decree for ejectment is passed against the tenant in favour of the landlord by the Assistant Collector for non-payment of the arrears of rent.2. The respondents are owners of the land comprised in Khasra Nos. 70, 102 106 and 107, situate in village Khalini, Tahsil Kasumpti, District Mahasu. This land was under the tenancy of Smt. Chinti and her son. The tenant had fallen in arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 600/- and, therefore, the land-owners filed a suit against Smt. Chinti and her son Parma Nand on 1st October, 1963 claiming the arrears of rent and for their ejectment. When this suit was pending in the Court of the Assistant Collector, First Grade, Mahasu, the tenant made an application...
NaraIn Dass Vs. Bhagwan Dass and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-11-1971
Reported in: AIR1972HP96
ORDERD.B. Lal, J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed by Narain Dass landlord under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, calling in question the order dated 16th March, 1970 of the Financial Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh, in a third appeal filed by the petitioner before him and which has been dismissed. Narain Dass being landlord of Khasra Nos. 131 and 132 Tika Matiari Dakhli Nagrota filed a suit under Section 77 of the Punjab Tenancy Act in the Court of the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Kangra, against his tenants Bhagwan Dass and Roshan Lal, respondents Nos. 1 and 2, and the allegations were that these tenants had not paid the rents from Rabi 1962 to Rabi 1964 and hence they should be ejected from their tenancy. The learned Assistant Collector decreed the suit in respect of Khasra No. 131 and also decreed it in respect of 2 Marias of Khasra No. 132 of which the total area is 4 Kanals and 3 Marias. Accordingly the suit was dismissed in respect of 4 Kanals and 1 Marias...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›