Himachal Pradesh Court January 1985 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.
Hem Raj Vs. Basta Singh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-1985
Reported in: AIR1987HP9
ORDERT.R. Handa, J. 1. In this revision petition filed under Section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act (Act No. III of 1949) (hereinafter called 'the Act'), the petitioner landlord has called in question the order dt. 11-3-1976 recorded by the District Judge, Shimla, exercising the power of Appellate Authority under the Act vide which the learned District Judge affirmed the order of the Rent Controller dt. 18-7-1973 dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner seeking ejectment of the respondents from the premises known as shop No. 57/1. The Mall, Shimla, under the tenancy of respondent 1. 2. Shri Basta Singh, respondent 1, is admittedly the tenant of the shop in question under the petitioner. The petitioner brought an action for ejectment of the respondents in respect of the said shop on the solitary ground that respondent 1 has sublet or otherwise transferred his rights under the lease in respect of the demised shop in favour of respondent 2. 3. The counter plea ...
Bhumi Dev Vs. the Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-1985
Reported in: AIR1986HP13
V.P. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner has moved this petition under Art. 226/227 of the Constitution praying that the proceedings in the election programme for election to the managing committee of respondent No. 1 (The Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.) be stayed and appropriate directions he issued for conducting the elections of the managing committee.2. Respondent No. 1 is a co-operative society and its members are primary cooperative agriculture service societies of the districts of Hamirpur, Kangra, Una, Kulu and Lahaul and Spiti. The Board of Directors of respondent No. 1 is the managing committee of respondent No. 1 and this managing committee is to conduct the entire administration and business of respondent No. 1.3. It is alleged that election to the managing committee is to be held in accordance with the rules given in Appendix 'A' of the Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Societies Rules (hereinafter the Rules) as contemplated by Rule 37. The managing committee is to be constitute...
Smt. Giano Devi Vs. Mangal Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-11-1985
Reported in: AIR1985HP82
H.S. Thakur, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the decree and judgment of the learned Single Judge (M. R. Ansari, J.), dated May 19, 1970. The appellant in the present appeal is the defendant in the suit whereas the respondents are the plaintiffs. The appellant shall hereinafter he referred to as the 'defendant' and the respondents as the 'plaintiffs'.2. A few facts relevant to decide this appeal may be stated. The plaintiffs filed the suit for declaration that they were in possession of the suit property as its owners and, in the alternative, for possession of the suit property. The case of the plaintiffs was that the suit property originally belonged to one Onkar Singh. He died on March 20, 1933 and. on his death, the property was inherited by his widow Smt. Giano Devi, the defendant, as a life tenant and mutation was attested in her favour on April 22, 1933. Four or five years after the death of Onkar Singh, the defendant contracted a second marriage with one Girdh...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Punnu Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-01-1985
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1270
ORDERV.P. Bhatnagar, J.1. The short question which falls for determination in this Criminal Revision is whether the provisions of R. 7(3) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) are mandatory or directory.2. The brief facts of the case are that a sample of Ajwain was taken from respondent-accused, Punnu Ram, from his shop at village Gerna on July 19,1982 by the Food Inspector. After completing the legal formalities, it was sent to the Public Analyst who found it to be adulterated. This resulted in the launching of prosecution against the respondent.3. At the stage of framing of the charge-sheet, a preliminary point was raised that the Public Analyst had not complied with the mandatory provisions of R. 7(3) ibid inasmuch as his report of the result of analysis was not delivered to the Local (Health) Authority within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the sample and that the said violation was fatal. This objection found favo...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›