Himachal Pradesh Court November 1992 Judgments

Om Parkash Vs. Smt. Sareshta Devi

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993HP71,I(1994)DMC308

Devinder Gupta, J. 1. Appellant has come up in appeal against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Hamirpur, dated 31st October, 1987 dismissing his petition seeking to have the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce. 2. The parties to the petition are working as teachers. They were married on 21st November, 1968, but there is no child of this marriage. The parties could not pull on together despite the fact that efforts were made to have the matter reconciled. Ultimately, the appellant on 14th November, 1983 filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') praying for a decree for Restitution of Conjugal Rights against the respondent. It is not disputed that on 9th January, 1985 the said petition was dismissed as not pressed. On the same day an application under Section 13B(1) of the Act was moved jointly by the parties seeking to have the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Copy of the said petit...

Sant Ram and anr. Vs. Mohinder Singh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Kamlesh Sharma, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 4th June, 1984 passed by the District Judge, Solan and Sirmaur Districts at Nahan whereby the appeal of the appellants-defendants was dismissed and the decree and judgment dated 31st May, 1978 of Sub Judge 1st Class, Nalagarh, District Solan, was affirmed.2. The Sub Judge 1st class, Nalagarh, had passed a decree in favour of respondent-plaintiff Mohinder Singh alias Shiv Kumar and against the appellants-defendants Sant Ram and Janki Ram, respondents-defendants No. 2 to 5, Inder Prabhu, Sohnu and Ram Kishan and one Munshi Ram, who were defendants No. 1 to 7 in the suit. It was declared that the respondent-plaintiff is the son of respondent-defendant Prabhu and the land in dispute was coparcenery and Joint Hindu Family property of respondent-plaintiff and respondents-defendants No. 3 to 5 and Munshi. The sales made by respondents-defendants No. 3 to 5 and Munshi in favour of appellant-defendant Sant Ram w...

Birbal Vs. Bimla Devi and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1993CriLJ1124

ORDERKamlesh Sharma, J. 1. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution India has been filed by petitioner Birbal for quashing order dated 16-8-1991 passed by the Sessions Judge, Hamirpur whereby his criminal revision No. 29 of 1990 was dismissed and the judgment dated 22nd October, 1990 of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hamirpur was confirmed. By judgment dated 22nd October, 1990, the Judicial Magistrate had dismissed his application under Section 126(2) Cr. P.C. for setting aside ex parte order dated 21st December, 1988, by which order the respondents, who are wife and minor daughter of the petitioner, were awarded maintenance allowance of Rs. 250/ - per month and Rs. 150/ - per month respectively.2. In his application under Section 126(2), Cr. P.C. for setting aside ex parte order dated 21st December, 1988 the petitioner has alleged that he was not served in the application under Section 125, Cr. P.C. filed by the respondents. According to ...