Himachal Pradesh Court July 1977 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.
Devi Singh and ors. Vs. Hukam Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1977HP85
R.S. Pathak, C.J.The question referred for our consideration is:--Whether, upon the facts of the present case, for the purpose of applying Section 3 of the Punjab Occupancy Tenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1953, the court is precluded from, going behind the entry recorded in the revenue records showing Hira and Smt. Devku as occupancy tenants and determining whetherapart from the entry they can be held to be occupancy tenants?2. On October 10, 1953 the plaintiff instituted a suit in the court of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kulu for recovery of possession of agricultural land. It was alleged that the land originally belonged to one Rai Bhagwant Singh, that he had granted tenancy rights therein to Hira under lease deeds covering different parcels of land. Consequent mutations were made in favour of Hira. On Feb. 26, 1942 Hira died, and mutation entries were made in favour of his widow, Smt. Devku. Hira and in her turn Smt. Devku, were recorded in the revenue records as occ...
Bipan Kumar Vs. Sham Sunder
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: AIR1977HP90
R.S. Pathak, C.J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit forpre-emption.2. The respondent filed a suit for preemption, and the suit was decreed by the learned Senior Subordinate Judge. An appeal against that decree has been dismissed by the learned District Judge.3. In this second appeal, two contentions are raised by learned counsel for the appellant. One is that ,the appellant was sued as a minor through his father Ved Brat when in fact the appellant was a major. It is stated that the plea was raised in the written statement, and yet no issue was framed by the learned Senior Subordinate Judge. When the appeal against the trial court decree was pending before the learned District Judge, an application was made by the appellant raising this point and urging that it be taken into consideration for disposing of the appeal. It appears that the application remained undisposed of and the appeal was dismissed. Learned counsel for the appellant urges that the learned Seni...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›