Himachal Pradesh Court November 1975 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.
Raj Kumar Rajindra Singh Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-1975
Reported in: AIR1976HP34
R.S. Pathak, C.J. 1. This is a miscellaneous petition by the respondents to the writ petition praying that the interim order already made in the case be modified and appropriate orders be passed safeguarding the interest of the State during the pendency of the writ petition. Similar miscellaneous petitions have been made in the connected writ petitions.2. In all these writ petitions, this Court has either made an order restraining the respondents from taking further proceedings under the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling Land Holdings Act, 1972 for the determination of the surplus area or an order permitting the proceedings to continue but restraining tine making of the final order determining the surplus area or, in some cases, an order merely restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioners from the surplus area. The learned Advocate General prays that during the pendency of the writ petitions the proceedings for the determination of the surplus area upto and including the order...
Smt. Sita Devi Vs. NaraIn Singh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1975
Reported in: AIR1976HP39
D.B. Lal, J. 1. Narain Singh and another filed a suit for possession against Smt. Sita Devi which was based on title. The learned Senior Subordinate Judge partly decreed the suit and partly dismissed it. The defendant came in appeal before the learned Additional District Judge but her appeal was dismissed because the same was withdrawn as a result to a compromise arrived at between the parties. Thereafter she came in second appeal before a learned single Judge of this Court. It was contended that the power of attorney granted in favour of the counsel representing the appellant did not authorise him to compromise the dispute or to withdraw the appeal. As such the order of the learned Additional District Judge was to be considered non est and that was the sole ground on which the second appeal was preferred before the High Court. The plea, however, did not prevail before the learned single Judge and the second appeal has been dismissed. Thereafter an application was made before the learn...
Chint Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1353
ORDERR.S. Pathak, C.J.1. The petitioner challenges an order for the confiscation of his goods made by the Special Tribunal constituted under the Defence and Internal Security of India Act, 1971.2. On a search made on July 18, 1975 of the petitioner's premises by the police authorities it was discovered that the petitioner had stocks of Gur and rice in excess of the maximum quantity which he could keep in stock. It was also found that the list of prices displayed by him was not signed. The case was taken up by the Special Tribunal constituted under Section 7 of the Defence and Internal Security of India Act, 1971 and the Tribunal held that the petitioner was guilty of a contravention of Clause (4) of the Himachal Pradesh Commodities Price Marking and Display Order, 1975 and of Clause 3(1)(a) of the Himachal Pradesh Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention Order, 1974. It convicted the accused accordingly and sentenced him to pay a fine in respect of each offence. It went on further to make ...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Ishwar Chand
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-12-1975
Reported in: AIR1976HP52,1977CriLJ43
R.S. Pathak, C.J. 1. This is a petition for a certificate under Article 134 of the Constitution to enable the State of Himachal Pradesh to appeal to the Supreme Court on certain points of law arising in a bail application.2. The respondent Ishwar Chand is a member of a partnership firm, Mahabir Trading Company, carrying on business in foodgrains at Solan. On a surprise check made on July 8, 1975 the police discovered that the godowns of the firm contained stocks of rice and salt in contravention of, the Himachal Pradesh Commodities Price Marking and Display Order. A case was registered under the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules, 1971 and a report was submitted to the Chief. Judicial Magistrate that it was proposed to arrest the respondent. The respondent applied for anticipatory bail before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, and on the application being rejected he applied to this Court for bail.3. In a number of other cases, also allegedly involving a contravention of the said...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›