Himachal Pradesh Court July 1982 Judgments

Smt. Tulsi Devi and ors. Vs. Bhagat Ram and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1983CriLJ72

ORDERVyas Dev Misra, C.J.1. This revision is directed against the order of Sessions Judge, Mandi, upholding the order of attachment passed under Section 140 of the Criminal P. C. by Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mandi.2. Bhagat Ram respondent (referred to as the tenant) is a tenant in a house in Mandi town under the petitioners (referred to as the landlords). The house is double storeyed. The ground floor as well as the first floor is occupied by the tenant. The tenant alleged that on 13th April, 1981 the landlords troke open the lock of the door of the first floor and threw the articles out and occupied the first floor. At that time the tenant was not in the house. When the tenant tried to enter the first floor, the landlords threatened him with dire consequences. The tenant moved an application under Section 145 of the Criminal P. C. After recording preliminary evidence, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed a preliminary order in terms of Section 145 of the Code and called upon the land...

Paras Ram Vs. Chander Dev and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

ORDERVyom Prakash Gupta, J.1. Padam Dev, defendant No. 2 (respondent No. 2), sold land (as detailed in the plaint) to Paras Ram, defendant No. 1 (petitioner) for a consideration of Rs. 3,575/-vide sale deed dated 16-8-1976.2. Chander Dev, plaintiff, (respondent 1) filed a suit for pre-emption in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Simla, on 16-8-1977. The suit was assigned to the Court of the Sub-Judge, Simla, for disposal. Defendant No. 1 contested the suit. In the suit the plaintiffs affirmative evidence was closed on 13-11-1980 and the suit was adjourned for defendant's evidence for 20-12-1980.3. On 20-12-1980 an application under Section 151 was filed by the defendant-petitioner praying that the suit of the plaintiff-respondent should be dismissed in view of the notification No. 16472 dated 2-7-1919. [t was alleged that by virtue of the aforesaid notification no right of pre-emption was available in the district of Simla.4. This application was contested by the -plaintiff. The Sub Judge...

Devi Saran and anr. Vs. Shri Ram Chand and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1982HP124

ORDERH.S. Thakur, J. 1. The petitioners (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) filed a suit against the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) in the Court of Additional Sub Judge, Mandi, for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession of the land in suit An application for a temporary injunction was also filed and the Sub Judge granted ad interim temporary injunction order to the plaintiffs. The ad interim injunction, however, was vacated. The plaintiffs preferred an appeal which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Mandi.2. Aggrieved by the order of the Additional District Judge, who affirmed the order of the trial Court, the plaintiffs have preferred this revision petition.3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the relevant record. Both the Courts below have tentatively come to the conclusion that she defendants are in possession of the land in suit. It is, however, not specifically he...

Smt. Munni Vs. Atma Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

H.S. Thakur, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Simla, who affirmed the decree and judgment passed by the Sub. Judge, Theog.2. Aggrieved by the said decree and judgment, the appellant has preferred this second appeal. The relevant facts may be stated. The respondent (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit against the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) for the possession of land measuring 6 bighas 4 biswas as detailed in the plaint. The land in suit was owned-by Smt. Sahabi, who was an old woman of about 70 years. She was not able to cultivate the land and appointed Shri Anant Ram, the father of the plaintiff, as her General Attorney by executing a registered document to this effect. Inter alia, she authorised the said Anant Ram to lease out the land to some one so that she may have some income and also save the expenses of its cultivation. The aforesaid Attorney leased out the suit land to...

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Madho Ram and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1983CriLJ65

Vyas Dev Misra, C.J.1. These two references have been made by Sessions Judge, Kangra. These arise out of the same incident.2. Madho Ram, Bansi Lal, and Jonki Ram accused were duly committed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra, to the Court of Session, for standing trial under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The trial was duly held and before the arguments could be concluded, it was brought to the notice of Sessions Judge that a cross case arising out of the same incident was pending trial whose proceedings had been stayed. The parties requested the Sessions Judge that that case should also be tried. The Sessions Judge, by his order dated 31st Aug. 1981, deferred the arguments in the Sessions trial till evidence in the counter case was recorded.3. The present Sessions Judge succeeded to the then Sessions Judge who passed the aforementioned order. When the case came up for hearing before the present Sessions Judge, he was not sure whether he could try the second case (Sessions Trial ...

Rangeel Singh Vs. the State and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1983CriLJ423

ORDERT.R. Handa, J.1. The Food Inspector Simla purchased a sample Of milk from Shri Bai Kishan, Respondent No. 3, on 27-5-1980. The said sample was purchased and dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter called 'the Food Act' and the Rules framed thereunder. On being analysed the sample was found adulterated and hence a complaint under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Food Act was filed by the Food Inspector against the respondent Bal Kishan. During the pendency of that complaint Bal Kishan respondent moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate in whose court the complaint wag pending praying that the present petitioner be impleaded as a co-accused under Section 20-A of the Food Act inasmuch as the milk out of which the sample had been purchased by the Food Inspector was supplied to him by this petitioner. That application was rejected by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Respondent No. 3 then approached...

Jogu Vs. Smt. Bhiki

Court: Himachal Pradesh

ORDERV.P. Gupta, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 25-9-1981 passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Kutu by which the application of the plaintiff petitioner under Section 65 of the Evidence Act, seeking permission to lead secondary evidence, was rejected.2. The plaintiff-petitioner Sled a suit fordeclaration to the effect that the plaintiff is owner and in possession of the suit property (detailed in the plaint) and in the alternative Cor possession of the property. The allegations are that Shayam Dass (now deceased) executed a gift deed (regarding disputed property) in plaintiff favour on 26-12-1974 The deed was registered on 27-12-1974 and the possession of the gifted property was delivered to the plaintiff. After execution of the gift deed, Shayam Dass (donor) re-ailed from the transaction. When the plaintiff was intimated about mutation proceedings an, the basis of the gift deed, he search-ed for the gift deed for showing the same to revenue authorities, but...