Jammu and Kashmir Court February 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.
Pushpa Devi Vs. Nanak Singh
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-27-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K1
Kotwal, J.1. The short question that falls for determination in this appeal is whether Section 5 of the Jammu & Kashmir Limitation Act, 1995 applies to appeals under Section 34 of the Jammu & Kashmir Hindu Marriage Act, 1980, herein-, after to be referred to as the Act,2. The appellant Pushpa Devi lost her petition under Section 12 of the Act in the court of District Judge, Jammu on 24-2-1981 and preferred an appeal against the aforesaid judgment in the High Court on 2-5-1981. Since it was beyond thirty days, the period of limitation provided for it by Section 34 of the Act, she also moved an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of the delay on various grounds. When this application came up for consideration before Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice, an objection was taken on behalf of the respondent that Section 5 of the Limitation Act was not applicable to appeals under Section 34 of the Act, which itself prescribed period of limitation for appeals, as...
Gupta Pvt. Loan Committee and ors. Vs. Smt. Sumitra Devi
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-27-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K4
Anand, J. 1. This is defendant's first appeal. It arises out of a final decree passed by the leraned District Judge, Jammu, on 28-5-1979 in a suit for recovery of Rs. 11400/- as principal amount and Rs. 3933/- as interest up to the date of suit, and future interest at the rate of 12%. In this appeal the defendant has challenged the correctness of the decree only to the extent of the award of interest of Rs. 3,933/- and future interest at the rate of 12% per annum and the judgment and decree has been not been assailed on any other account. Therefore, it is not necessary for us to deal with the facts of the case except in so far as the same are relevant for the purpose of deciding the limited issue. 2. Since the challenge is confined only to a part of decree for Rs. 3933/-, the defendant has paid court-fee of Rs. 423.50 on the said amount. At the very outset, therefore, a question has arisen as to whether this appeal should be heard by a single Judge or by a Division Bench of the High Co...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›