Jammu and Kashmir Court October 1982 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.
Ram Kishore Pandey Vs. State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-20-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ904
A.S. Anand, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Anantnag, dated 18-2-1980.2. The appellant, serving as a sepoy in the 7th Guards Unit of the Army, was posted on duty as a guardsman on the water-point at Khrew. He was posted there, on 26-8-1973. Rifle No. 7-62-MM-SLF/V-1404 along with five cartridges of 7.6-MM was issued to him. According to the prosecution version the appellant absented himself from duty and after stealing some cartridges from his officer, Shri R. C. Choudhry, went on a shooting spree near village Amlar. It is alleged that at about 3 P.M. on 28-8-1973 near village Amlar he stopped PW, Mehda Bhat and asked him as to what was contained in the bag that was being carried by the witness. On being told that the bag contained only some 'saag' (vegetable), the appellant searched the bag and thereafter desired to take a search of the pockets of the witness. The witness refused to allow the search of his pockets on which the appellant...
Om Parkash Vs. Mohant Hari Krishen
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-18-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K40
ORDERI.K. Kotwal, J.1. This revision petition arises in the following circumstances :Mahant Hari Krishen, the respondent herein brought a suit for ejectment and recovery of Rs. 5,600/- for use and occupation of the suit house against the two petitioners, Om Parkash and Satpal and one Neak Ram in the court of Sub-Judge, Jammu. The defendants having failed to appear despite service, an ex parte decree for ejectment and recovery of Rs. 5,600/- was passed on 10-11-1979 against the petitioner Om Parkash alone and the suit was dismissed against the other two defendants. An application for setting aside the same was made on 4-3-1980 by the petitioners in terms of Order 9, Rule 13, C. P. C. on the grounds : firstly, that they were not duly served in the suit; secondly, that in spite of that they had engaged one Mr. B. K. Bhasin, advocate to represent them in the court, who acted negligently and allowed the suit to proceed ex parte against them; thirdly, that he never informed them that an ex p...
Delhi Vanaspati Syndicate Vs. K.C. Chawala
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-18-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K65
I.K. Kotwal, J.1. This is defendant's revision petition, who in a suit for ejectment, out of which the revision petition has arisen, has been directed by the trial Court to answer certain interrogatories delivered to him by the plaintiff in terms of Order 11, Rule 1 C.P.C. The issues were raised in the suit by the trial Court on the pleadings of the parties, which read as under:1. Whether annual income of the defendant is more than Rs. 40,000.00 and he is not entitled to protection of J. & K. Houses and Shops Rent Control Act ?O. P. P.2. Whether the tenancy of the defendant has been terminated by the service of a legally valid notice ?O. P. P.2. The onus of these issues being on him, the plaintiff, who is respondent herein, by making an application to that effect sought to serve the following set of interrogatories on the petitioner:(1) What is the constitution of M/s. Delhi Vanaspati Syndicate ?(2) Where is the head office of the defendant company ?(3) What is the total annual income ...
Hardatt Sharma Vs. Jaikishen Shamlal and Sons and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-09-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K29
I.K. Kotwal, J.1. This judgment will govern the disposal of Civil Misc. Appeal No. 90 of 1981 and Civil Misc. Petition No. 152 of 1982, moved on behalf of the State of Jammu and Kashmir for being impleaded as a party-respondent to the aforesaid appeal.2. The appeal has a chequered history. The appellant, Hardatt Sharma, in a suit brought by him on 22-10-1979, obtained a consent decree on 27-10-1979, i.e. only five days thereafter, from the court of Sub-Judge (C.J.M.), Jammu, against respondents 1 to 3, namely, Messrs. Jaikishen Shamlal and Sons, a partnership firm and its two partners Jai Kishen and Sham Lal. The decree was to the effect that all the timber in compartments Nos. 16 and 18A in Batote range of Ramban Forest Division, whether standing, felled or sawn, including saw bands installed therein, were his exclusive property and that respondents 1 to 3 could not transfer, or agree to transfer the aforesaid property to any person, nor could they remove the same from there and nor c...
Ghulam Nabi Seh Vs. Gaffer Wagey
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-08-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K67
ORDERMufti Baha-Ud-Din Farooqi, Acting. C.J.1. This revision is directed against an order dated 4-9-1980 passed by Sub Judge, Anantnag dismissing an execution application. The decree was passed on 15-9-1971'. After sometime an execution petition was filed which was signed and verified by a Vakil who was not duly authorised. That petition was, however, consigned to records on 6-5-1974. Subsequently another execution petition was filed which was again signed by a Vakil who was not duly authorised. The Executing Court of Sub Judge, Anantnag, relying upon, the decision in Appaji Chetti v. Govindasami Reddi, AIR 1937 Mad 760, held that both the applications having been made by a Vakil who was not duly authorised, they were not in accordance with law and consequently the second application was liable to be dismissed as incompetent and time-barred. The court passed an order accordingly.2. In the case of Appaji Chetti (supra) it has been observed as follows :--'It is contended that an executio...
Mushtaq Ahmad Mashki Vs. Mohd. Shafi Bhat and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Oct-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K44
Kotwal, J.1. This is a minor defendant's appeal, against a decree for specific performance of an executory sale in respect of immovable property, passed by the trial court in a suit brought against him and his father, the father being shown therein as the guardian of his minor son, the appellant.2. Respondents 1 & 2, who are the plaintiffs in the suit out of which this appeal has arisen, sued the appellant and respondent No. 3, his real father, in the court of District Judge at Sri-nagar for specific performance of an agreement to sell a building situated at Maisuma, Srinagar, for a total consideration of Rs. 30,000/-, said to have been executed by respondent No. 3 in their favour on 19-2-1970, on his own behalf, as well as on behalf of the appellant as his natural guardian, alleging therein that respondent no. 3 was the sole owner of the suit property and that the appellant was only a benamidar. It was further alleged that out of the total consideration of Rs. 30,000/- only Rupees 10,...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›