Himachal Pradesh Court April 1981 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.
Kewal Singh and ors. Vs. Munshi Ram and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-1981
Reported in: AIR1982HP36
Vyom Prakash Gupta, J.1. Jagan Nath sold land measuring 21 Kanals 12 Marias situate in village Kungrat to Sadhu Ram and others by a registered sale deed Ex. D-2 dated 19-11-1959 for a consideration of Rs. 1,000/-.2. Kewal Singh plaintiff claiming himself to be a son of the vendor, filed a pre-emption suit (No. 514 of 1960) Claiming the possession of the disputed property, and another pre-emption suit (No. 500 of 60) was filed by Munshi Ram son of Shri Udham Singh claiming himself to be a brother of the vendor claiming possession of the disputed property.3. Both these suits were consolidated vide order dated 3-1-1961 of Sub Judge, Una, In the suit of Kawal Singh the other rival pre-emptor Munshi Ram had been impleaded as defendant No. 7.4. Both these suits were contested and on the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed :--1. Whether the plaintiff and the rival pre-emptor have a preferential right of pre-emption against vendees defendants and if so what are their righ...
Prem Pal Singh and ors. Vs. Mohan Lal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-28-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ1208
ORDERT.R. Handa, J.1. By this petition moved under Section 482 of the Code of Griminal Procedure, the petitioners seek the quashing of the criminal proceedings now pending against them in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kulu under Sections 448, 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, petitioner No. 1 is the Secretary of the Marketing Committee, Kulu, petitioner No. 2 is the Fee Collector, Marketing Committee, Kulu and petitioner No. 3 is a daily paid employee in the same Market Committee.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are short and simple. On 24-7-1979 a petition of complaint was filed by Shri Mohan Lai respondent against the present petitioners under Sections 448, 500, 501 and 504, I.P.C. in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kulu. The allegations in the complaint were that on 21-7-1979 at about 6 P. M. the petitioners entered the shop of the respondent-complainant without his permission and on so entering they forcibly took into possession certain books ...
Mahabir Parshad Vs. Des Raj
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981HP58
ORDERV.P. Gupta, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 31-3-1978 passed by the Sub-Judge, Una on an application under Order 22, Rule 3 of Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called the Code), filed by the present petitioner.2. The brief facts are that Kodu alias Izzat Rai son of Krishan Dass filed a suit for declaration and injunction and also in the alternative for possession of the land detailed in the plaint in the Court of Sub-Judge, Una on 6-11-1970, against Des Raj respondent The defendant contested the suit and this suit was fixed for 5-12-1976 for defendant's evidence. On 5-12-1976 the plaintiff or his counsel did not appear in Court and as such the suit was dismissed in default by the Sub-Judge, Una.3. Application foe restoration of the suit was filed by the plaintiff Kodu on 18-12-1976 and it was alleged that on 5-12-1976, due to illness he could not appear in person and also could not bring his counsel from Hoshiarpur for conducting the case. Notice of this ap...
The State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Daulat Ram Attri
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1981HP71
V.D. Misra, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of R. F, As. Nos. 451 to 459 of 1980 since these arise out of a common judgment,2. The appeals are directed against the judgment of Shri C. S. Sauhta, Land Acquisition Court (District Judge Solan and Sirmur Districts at Nahanj --ho by a common judgment enhanced the compensation awarded to the claimants in respect of the acquired land.3. By a motification dated 16th February, 1974 issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter rei'erred to as the Act), land measuring 206 bighas 1'5 biswas, situated in village Mantaru Wala, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, was acquired for the purpose of timber depot. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was subsequently issued on 17th June, 1974.4. The Land Acquisition Collector came to the conclusion that the acquired land was of four categories. These were : (1) Obar Aval, (2) Obar II, (3) Banjar Kadim, and (4) Gairmumkin Abadi. For the first category Rs. 3000/- per bigha, for the second catego...
Surat Singh and Etc. Etc. Vs. Kahan Singh and ors. Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-1981
Reported in: AIR1982HP15
ORDERVyas Dev Misra, C.J.1. This judgment will dispose of a number of petition in which a common question of law has arisen.2. In order to provide relief from indebtedness to certain farmers, landless agricultural labourers, and rural artisans in the State of Himachal Pradesh, the State Legislative Assembly pasted the Himachal Pradesh Relief of Agricultural indebtedness Act (Act No. 17 of 1976) (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It came into force on 13th Nov., 1975. Since the relief was to be granted only to a defined class of farmers, various words were defined by Section 2 (1) of the Act. We may now note the relevant provision of this Sub-section:'(a) 'agriculturist' means a person who cultivates land personally;(b) 'appointed day' means the 13th Nov., 1975; xx xx xx xx(f) 'debt' with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions means any liability in cash or kind, whether secured or unsecured due from a debtor whether payable under a decree or order of any Civil Court or o...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›