Himachal Pradesh Court January 1972 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.
Smt. Sharab Chhonzam Vs. Smt. Suraj Mani
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-20-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1017
ORDERD.B. Lal, C.J.1. This is an application for transfer of a criminal complaint case,under Section 526 Cr.PC from the Court of Magistrate First Class, Booh, District Kinnaur, to some other competent Magistrate, for trial. As revealed from the application, the grounds of transfer are, that the learned Magistrate has not given opportunity to the accused petitioner Shrimati Sharab Chhonzam for engaging a counsel to defend her; that no lawyer is practising at Pooh and she has to bring a lawyer from Kalpa or Rampur; that while on tour, the learned Magistrate stays with the complainant at village Rib-b'a and receives presents from her; that all the witnesses belong to Ribba which is near Kalpa as compared to Pooh and that the case for these reasons need be transferred from Pooh to Kalpa. The petition was formerly moved before the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasu who sent for the comments of the Magistrate concerned. The comments which arrived indicated that Smt. Sharab Chhonzam was adopting ...
Tara Chand Vs. Goverdhan Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-05-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ83
ORDERChet Ram Thakur, J.1. This is a revision petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed against the judgment and order, dated 13.10.1970 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Mandi affirming on appeal the order of the Magistrate First Class, Mandi directing tile petitioner to pay a compensation of Rs. 30/- each to the 11 respondents under Section 250 Criminal P.C. or in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 30 days each.2. Tara Chand petitioner had filed a complaint under Sections 447/427 I.P.C. against Goverdhan Singh and 11 others on the allegations that they had made a criminal trespass in Khasra No. 221 measuring 3.13.4 Bighas situate in village Parwara District Mandi on 20.8.1969. The land was in the lawful possession of the petitioner for over last 40 years.3. This complaint was dismissed and the accused were discharged by the Magistrate First Class. According to the Magistrate, the complaint was false and frivolous and he therefore, issued notice, as required ...
Ashok Kumar and ors. Vs. Om Prakas and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-1972
Reported in: AIR1973HP25
D.B. Lal, C.J.1. This second appeal arises out of an order dated 15th June, 1971 of the Additional District Judge, Dharamsala. whereby he has returned the memorandum of appeal under Order 7, Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, for presentation to another Court.2. The appellants Ashok Kumar and four others filed a suit for recovery of possession of land measuring 6 Kanals and 9 Marias comprising Khasra Nos. 426/354 and 353, situate in Tensil Palam-pur of the District of Kangra. In the plaint the suit was valued for purposes of Court-fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 3.50 and Rs. 10.50 respectively, on 10 times of the land revenue for the purpose of Court-fee, and 30-times of the land revenue for the purpose of jurisdiction. The learned Sub-Judge before whom the suit was filed, dismissed the same on 25th September, 1970. as he held, the defendants to be in possession as tenants and not as trespassers, as claimed by the plaintiffs. Accordingly on 26th October, 1970 the plaintiffs filed an appe...
Hari Dass Vs. Hiroo and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-03-1972
Reported in: AIR1973HP28
D.B. Lal, C.J.1. This second appeal is directed against the decision dated 26th of May, 1970 of the District Judge. Mahasu in a suit for declaration, where in partly disagreeing with the Sub-Judge, Theog, he has decreed the suit to the extent that he has held that the plaintiff along with defendants 2 to 6, is the owner of one-half share in the property. The plaintiff Hari Dass has felt aggrieved of the decision, and has preferred this second appeal having lost the suit in full before the Sub-Judge, Theog, and in part before the first appellate Judge.2. It is regrettable that after having laboured for long, the learned counsel for the appellant had to abandon the judgment of the learned District Judge by remarking that the same was totally unintelligible to him. Under Order 20. Rule 4 of fhe Civil P. C., the learned District Judge was required to write a statement of the case, the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for such decision. His judgment is rather ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›