Himachal Pradesh Court August 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.
State of Himachal Pradesh Through Shri M.G. Chitkara, Advocate General ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-1977
Reported in: AIR1978HP1
R.S. Pathak, C.J.1. We have heard the learned Advocate General in this and the connected appeals.2. Two common questions have been raised in all the nine appeals. One is that the learned single Judge has misread the evidence on the record and therefore has erroneously come to the finding that the timber was not samuda. It seems to us that the question really fell for determination within the powers of the Arbitrator. Whether or not the, timber was samuda was a point for him to decide on the merits. But apart from this, even if we assume that the learned single Judge was right in himself considering the point, we are not satisfied that his finding is vitiated by any error in considering the evidence. We have been taken through the evidence by the learned Advocate General, and taking it in its entirety the finding reached by the learned single Judge appears to be justified.3. The other question is whether the finding of the learned single Judge is right that the Arbitrator did not commit...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Rajkumar Rajinder Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978HP36
R.S. Pathak, C.J. 1. This and the connected appeal have been filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh against the award of the learned District Judge, Mahasu, in two references made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2. The Himachal Pradesh Government issued two notifications in October 1967 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act declaring that land in the villages of Shahdhar and Maihgaon in Tehsil of Rampur, District Mahasu was needed, for the purpose of widening the Sarahan-Daranghati road. The two parcels of land belonged to the respondent, Rajkumar Rajinder Singh. Thereafter, on following the further procedure detailed in the land Act the Collector made an award determining the compensation payable to the respondent at Rs. 1,437.50 in respect of the land invillage Shahdhar and Rs. 2,831.87 for the land in village Majhgaon. In both cases, the compensation included 15% compulsory acquisition charges. The Collector made an order that the compensation so determined ...
ishwar Singh Vs. Smt. Ram Piari and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-16-1977
Reported in: AIR1978HP39
T.U. Mehta, J. 1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order recorded by our learned brother Mr. Justice Lal sitting singly in C. M. P. (M) No. 26 of the 1973 on 30-11-1973. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the respondent No. 1 by her learned Advocate Shri Sud, that this Letters Patent Appeal is not maintainable under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent constituting the High Court of Judicature at Lahore, dated 21-3-1919. It is an admitted position that these Letters Patent of the Lahore High Court are applicable to the procedure adopted by this Court also.2. Following are the short facts which constitute the background of this appeal. The respondent No. 1 Ram Piari is the wife of the present appellant Ishwar Singh and she filed an application for maintenance under Section 488 of the Cr. P. C. of 1898. The respondent No. 1 was awarded maintenance in the amount of Rs. 75/- per month. The said order was originally passed by the concerned Nayay Panchayat. Against th...
Gainda Mal Charanji Lal Vs. the State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1978HP17
T.U. Mehta, J.1. The petitioner herein is a registered partnership firm and carries on, inter alia, the business of transportation of goods as carriers in Punjab, Haryana, Union Territory of Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh. By this writ petition it has challenged the vires of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act called Himachal Pradesh Passengers and Goods Taxation Act, 1955 (Act 15 of 1955) (which is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and second proviso to Rule 9 of the Rules framed under the Act on 13th March, 1970.2. The matter first came up before me sitting as a single Judge on 5th May, 1977. Since it was found that the petitioner had challenged the validity of the provisions contained in Sections 3 and 4 of the Act, all the three Judges of this Court were required to determine the question about the said vires as provided in Sub-article (3) of the Article 228 (a) of the Constitution. Accordingly this Full Bench was constituted to consider the following three questions which were referr...
Ram Prakash and ors. Vs. Lekh Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1977HP89
R.S. Pathak, C.J. 1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. 2. The plaintiffs are three minors. The suit was instituted through their next friend. Ram Kishan. The trial Court decreed the suit. An appeal was filed by the vendees. On August 16, 1975 the learned District Judge, Solan allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit on the ground that Ram Kishan could not constitute himself the next friend of the minors as his interest in the suit was adverse to that of minors. The plaintiffs appeal. 3. The learned District Judge has come to the conclusion that Ram Kishan could not properly be the next friend of the minors because he was not related to the minors, and that it seemed that the real intention of Ram Kishan was to manage the land in dispute for his own benefit. Learned counsel for the appellants urges that the considerations which prevailed with the learned District Judge are erroneous, and that in any event the suit should not have been dismissed but the...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›