Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1981J& K103
ORDERMufti Baha-ud-din Farooqi, Ag. C.J.1. One Abdul Gani Khan (hereinafter called the decree-holder) obtain-ed a money decree against Ghulam NabiKhan (hereinafter called 'the judgment-debtor') from the Court of the Judge, Small Causes, Srinagar. The decretal amount including the cost amounted to Rs. 1,795/-. The decree-holder filed an application for the execution of the decree. During the pendency of the execution proceedings, the parties entered into a compromise by which the decree-holder agreed to grant rebate and accept the sum of Rs. 1,157/- only and, that too, in two instalments of Rupees 200/- and Rs. 957/-. The agreement was subject to the condition that the judgment-debtor shall pay the first instalment on 20-10-74 and the other within one year thereafter and, that in the event of default the decree-holder shall be entitled to recover the decretal amount in full as provided in the decree. In terms of the compromise, the judgment-debtor paid the first instalment of Rs. 200/- ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1981J& K68
ORDERMufti Baha-ud-Din Farooqi, Actg. C.J.1. By lease deed dated 14th March, 1969, Mrs. C. K. Atri leased out a bungalow together with its annexe and land appurtenant thereto situated at Boulevard, Srinasar to the Chief Engineer Project Beacon through President of India at a monthly rental of Rs. 700. Smt. Atri has died. She is survived by Dr. S. K. Atri and Mr. Vijav Atri, Dr. Atri issued a notice terminating the lease and thereafter instituted a suit, being Original suit No. 52 of 1979, in the court of City Judge, Srinagar for the recovery of possession of the premises based on the determination of the lease. He impleaded Chief Engineer Hqr. Project Beacon, Union of India and Sh. Vijay Atri as defendants. On 10-8-1979, Union of India moved an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act for an order staying the proceedings of the suit and requiring the plaintiff to take steps for reference of the dispute to the arbitrator in terms of Clause 8 of, the lease agreement. Clause (8...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 1981CriLJ924
ORDERI.K. Kotwal, J.1. The petitioners, Abdul Majeed Jildsaz, Abdul Maiid Nashti and Mahmmad Ramzan Bhat have been arrested by the police in FIR No. 495 of 1980, Police Station Anantnag, for having committed offences under Sections 307. 148, 336, 332, 152, 153-A and 149, R. P.C. read with Section 13(1) of the Unlawful Activities Act. The police have also put up a challan against them in the Court of Special Judge (Sessions Judge) Anantnag, as some of the offences, viz., offences under Sections 148, 152 and 153-A are exclusively triable by him. An application for bail was moved on behalf of the petitioners before the Special Judge, but the same has been dismissed by him on the ground that Section 497-B of the Cr. P.C. was a bar against granting them bail, as in his opinion, there are reasonable grounds for believing that they are prima facie guilty of the aforesaid offences. They have now moved This court in a revision petition against the aforesaid order.2. Appearing for the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 1981CriLJ448
ORDERMufti Baha-Ud-Din Farooqi, Actg. C.J.1. These revisions, one by the State and the other by the complainant, are directed against an order passed on 10-4-1980, by the Sessions Judge, Srinagar. The order reads thus:After the opening address, it was found that a prima facie case under Sections 304/504/447 R.P.C. is made out against the accused Ab. Rahim Rather. The learned P. P. in his opening address conceded that it was not a case under Section 302 R.P.C. but prima facie, a case under Section 304 R.P.C. was made out against this accused. As against the accused Abdul Ahad Khan a prima facie case under Section 504 R.P.C. was made out. The accused Abdul Rahim Rather was, therefore, charged under Section 304/504/447 R.P.C. and the accused Abdul Ahad Khan was charged under Section 504 R.P.C. The contents of the charges were read out to the accused persons. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. So the P. P. should produce evidence in the case now. Put up the case on 28, 29 and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1981J& K25
1. The parties are husband and wife. They were married sortie time in the year 1974. Hardly six months after the marriage, the husband met with violence from his brother with the result that he lost his eyesight and became totally blind. The wife went back to her parental house and never returned. The husband sued her for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Jammu and Kashmir Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter called '1955 Act'). The lower court dismissed the application holding that, in the circumstances, the wife had a 'reasonable excuse' for withdrawing from the society of her husband. The husband appealed. The appeal came up before one of us, namely, Mufti J. as he then was. Before him the argument on behalf of the appellant-husband was that the expression 'reasonable excuse' appearing in Sub-section (1) of Section 9 of 1955 Act was restricted to the grounds which under Sub-section (2) could be a ground either for judicial separation, or for divorce, or for dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : AIR1981J& K38
1. The sole point urged on behalf of the State at the time of hearing of his appeal was that the learned Addl. District Judge should not have preferred the rates proposed in the tentative award over the rates approved by the Revenue Minister. In order to appreciate this contention, it will be necessary to give a few facts. The Government acquired land for storage tank commonly known as 'Arzan Gurzon' at Chari-Sharief. The land so acquired included the land belonging to the respondents. The Collector prepared a tenatative award and proposed the rates for the different kinds of land as under:-Abi Awal ...Rs. 800/- per kanalMaidaniRs. 700/- -do-LabrooRs. 650/- -do-Uncultivatedland.Rs. 450/- -do-The proposal went to the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, for its onward transmission to the Revenue Minister. The Divisional Commissioner sent back the proposal and asked the Collector to reconsider the rates in respect of Labroo and uncultivated land. The Collector revised the rates for Labroo a...
Tag this Judgment!