Himachal Pradesh Court April 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.
Devta Chikhreshwar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1972
Reported in: AIR1972HP122
ORDERChet Ram Thakur, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Devta Chikhreshwar through Shri Daulat Ram, Karta and President of the Temple of the aforesaid deity as a next friend for setting aside the order and judgment of the learned District Judge, dated 24th November, 1967, upholding the judgment and order of the learned Compensation Officer, Mahasu.2. The petitioner's land vested under the provisions of S. 27 of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the State Government on the passing of the Act. The; petitioner alleges that he is a small landowner and he had applied to the Compensation Officer for giving him rehabilitatioa grant as he had no other land for his maintenance. But this application was opposed on the ground that the applicants viz., Daulat Ram and Mohan Lal were not competent inasmuch as they had no locus standi to file this application o...
Paras Ram Vs. State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-25-1972
Reported in: 1972CriLJ1093
ORDERD.B. Lal, J.1. This revision has been presented against the judgment dated 30th June 1971, of the Sessions Judge Mandi in a case under Sections 447 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code whereby agreeing with the findings of the Magistrate First Class Sundernagar he has convicted the petitioner Paras Ram and has sentenced him to fine of Rs. 100/- in default simple imprisonment for a term of one month under Section 447 and to a fine of Rs. 200/- in default simple imprisonment for a term of two months under Section 448. Besides making this order of conviction, the learned Sessions Judge also confirmed the findings of the learned Magistrate under Section 522 of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereby the complainants have been restored possession of the land and building which were the subjectmatter of the dispute. The petitioner-accused Paras Ram was proceeded against, upon allegations that on 1st May, 1966, he broke open the lock of a room meant for a school which was constructed by the l...
Bhagat Ram Vs. Smt. Lilawati Galib
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-24-1972
Reported in: AIR1972HP125
D.B. Lal, J. 1. Bhagat Ram has presented this Execution Second Appeal against the order dated 3rd April, 1972 of the District Judge, Mahasu, dismissing his objection under Section 47, Civil P. Code, as a result of which he is likely to be evicted from a house, which is part of a building known as 'Om Bhawan', below Lakkar Bazar, Simla. The decree-holder is Smt. Lilawati Galib who claims to be the landlady of the house. The facts in brief are, that Bhagat Ram was made tenant in the house and a lease was exectited on 29th December, 1966. The period fixed under the lease was for one year which was to expire on 6-12-1967. On 12-5-1967, the landlady gave a notice determining the ten-ancy under Section 106 of the T. P. Act, and the tenant having failed to vacate, instituted a regular suit for his eviction on 29-12-1967. According to the landlady, the construction of the building was com-pleted on 27th December, 1966 and, therefore, under a Notification dated 18-8-1966, issued by the Punjab G...
H.S. Bedi Vs. Smt. Dhanni Devi and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-18-1972
Reported in: AIR1973HP47
R.S. Pathak, C.J.1. This is a petition praying for certificates under Sub-clauses (b) and (c) of Clause (1) of Art, 133 of the Constitution.2. The premises described as Shop No. 50. The Mall. Simla, consist partly of residential accommodation and partly of commercial accommodation. The en-tire premises were let out by the first Respondent Dhanni Devi to the second Respondent Krishan Kumar, and it appears that thereafter Krishan Kumar occupied the commercial portion of the accommodation only and sub-let the residential portion to the petitioner. An application was made by Dhanni Devi for the ejectment of the petitioner and Krishan Kumar on the ground that Krishan Kumar had sub-let the accommodation to the petitioner without her permission. The application was reject-ed on the finding that the sub-letting had been effected with her permission. Thereafter an application was made by Dhanni Devi under Section 13 (3) (a) (i) of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949. She claimed possessi...
Roop Lal Vs. State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-13-1972
Reported in: AIR1973HP14
ORDERChet Ram Thakur, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Patwari in the Consolidation of Holdings Department at Arki on 1st May, 1960, but due to the retrenchment of the post his services were terminated and on a request by the Director of Consolidation of Holdings to all the Deputy Commissioners the petitioner was selected for appointment as & Patwari and on the 4th March. 1963. an offer was made to him for being appointed as a Patwari within Mahasu district, vide Annexure B. He joined his duty as Patwari on 8th March, 1963, but on the 15th September, 1965, he received a copy of an office order, dated 15th September, 1965, terminating his services along with some other employees mentioned in that office order. Thereafter the petitioner represented to the Collector. Mahasu, but he did not get any reply. He again sent his reminders and on 18th May, 1966, he was told that his representation has been rejected. Thereafter he made further representation to the Financial Commissioner, Hi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›