Jammu and Kashmir Court February 1993 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 Lal Vs. the State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-18-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ736
A.M. Mir, J.1. Convicted under Section 302, RFC and sentenced to imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of which he will undergo three months further simple imprisonment, appellant-accused has preferred the present criminal appeal against the judgment of Sessions Judge Kathua dated 12-7-1990. The man grounds on which the present appeal is filed are as under:--(i) That the impugned judgment/order is perverse because the evidence has been mis-appreciated.(ii) That the prosecution witnesses happen to be close relatives of the deceased and the Trial Court while believing their statements has committed an error of law;(iii) That even if the prosecution version would be believed it was a case of 'mistake' and conviction under Section 302 RFC was. not warranted.Brief facts of the prosecution case :Deceased, Karan Singh, a young student who use to sleep in his father's shop for keeping a watch and ward during night, left his house at 10.30 p.m. on 15th July, 1986...
J and K State Forest Corporation and anr. Vs. Rabail Singh
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Feb-10-1993
Reported in: 1993ACJ499,(1993)IILLJ502J& K
V.K. Gupta, J.1. This is an application for condonation of delay for filing C.I.M.A. No. 27 of 1992 against the judgment and award dated December 30, 1991, passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.2. In the application for condonation of delay, it is averred by the appellants that an earlier appeal against the same award was filed by the appellants before this court, but the same was dismissed on February 26, 1992, for the reason that the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by a certificate of the Commissioner to the effect that the amount of the award has been deposited before the Commissioner. It is further contended that the information about the dismissal of the appeal was conveyed to the appellants on February 28, 1992 and on the next date the awarded amount was deposited before the Commissioner The appeal was ultimately filed on March 4, 1992 along with the application for condonation of delay.3. In support of the application, Mr. Malik, learned ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›