Jammu and Kashmir Court May 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.
Samad Dar Vs. Mohamed Ismail Tantrary
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: May-14-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K59
ORDERMufti Baha-Ud-Din Farooqi, Actg. C.J. 1. In a suit for declaration that the sale deed allegedly executed by the plaintiff on 20th Poh, 2009, in favour of the defendant and registered on 21st of Magh, 2009, is a fake document and consequently null and void and inoperative under law, the trial Court of sub-Judge, Judge Small Causes Court, Srinagar, raised the following two preliminary issues:-- (1) Is not the suit maintainable in the present form without a prayer for decree for possession? OPD (2) Is the suit hit by the provisions of the Agrarian Reforms Act? O. P. D. 2. The trial Court found both the issues in favour of the plaintiff. The argument of the learned counsel for the defendant is that the judgment is erroneous. His first target was the finding of trial Court that a suit for declaration simpliciter would lie and further relief for possession need not be asked for. He submitted that Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act is a clear bar against a suit for declaration where ...
Dr. Prem Nath Vs. Cantonment Board and anr.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: May-14-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K60
ORDERMufti Baha-Ud-Din Farooqi, Actg. C.J. 1. The plaintiff instituted a suit for injunction restraining the Cantonment Board, Srinagar, and the Military Estates Officer, Badamibagh Cantt., Srinagar, from demolishing the peripheral wall surrounding his house and ad-joining premises. In reply it was contended in the written statement that the plaintiff had constructed Latrine, poultry farm, and had erected a wooden fencing on the defence land which is adjacent to the private land without any permission from the Military Estates Officer or the Cantonment Board Badamibagh Cantonment. Their further contention was that the encroachment was removed on 2-12-1978 but the plaintiff again encroached upon the defence land implying the land belonging to the cantonment authority', and carried out the construction of the latrine, poultry farm, and wooden fencing without any permission of the cantonment board. It was also contended that the plaintiff had issued no notice under Section 80 CPC either t...
Ghulam Mohamad Sodagar Vs. Ghulam Ahmed Baba and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: May-13-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K62
ORDERMufti Baha-Ud-Din Farooqi, Actg. C.J.1. This order will govern the disposal of C.M.P. Nos. 33 and 38 of 1981. By virtue of C.M.P. No. 33 of 1981, respondent Nos. 1 to 3 moved this court for dismissal of the appeal titled Ghulam Mohamad Baba Versus Ghulam Ahmed Sodagar on the plea that inasmuch as the appellant had assigned his interest in the suit property to Habib Ullah Sodagar, his right to pursue the appeal had got extinguished. It was further pleaded that three years had elapsed since the assignment was made but the assignee had not cared to seek leave of the court to continue the appeal and this constituted an additional reason for the dismissal of the appeal. This application was moved on 9th of March 1981. Soon after, on 26th of Mar., 1981, Habib Ullah Sodagar moved an application, being C.M.P. No. 38 of 1981, saying that the alleged assignment had really been made in his favour and ask-ed for leave to continue the appeal as the assignee of the appellant, 2. At the hearing ...
Jhelum Forest Company Vs. Conservator of Forests, Kashmir, North Circl ...
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: May-11-1982
Reported in: AIR1983J& K12
1. By virtue of an agreement deed dated 31st of Jan., 1962, the appellant purchased the right to convert and remove the Umber from the trees marked for felling in compartment No. 70, Buniyar Range, Jhelum Forest Division. The period of agreement was stipulated to last till the end of Nov., 1965. The appellant was, however, allowed several extensions and the last extension expired in the year 1969. The Government found that an amount of rupees three lakhs and odd was due and payable by the appellant on account of arrear royalty under the agreement. The competent authority issued a certificate to that effect and required the Collector to recover the amount as arrears of land revenue. Thereupon the appellant filed an application, being arbitration application no. 14 of 1975, in this Court. His contention was that the value of the remnant stock in the forest was four lakhs and odd and that he was entitled to claim allowance for this amount and as a result of set-off, the Government was lia...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›