Jammu and Kashmir Court July 2001 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.
Gurcharan Singh Vs. J. and K. Special Tribunal and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: AIR2001J& K74
ORDERSyed Bashir-ud-Din, J.1. Writ Petitioner Gurcharan Singh is a tenant of respondent No. 6, after he obtained the lease of the Shop No. 4 measuring 27' x 12' in the Commercial Complex of Respondent No. 6 at Maisuma Budshah Chowk Srinagar way back in November, 1994. The landlord Respondent No. 6 is engaged in constructional activities in raising floors above the petitioner's rented shop. He has got sanction under Section 4 of the Jammu and Kashmir Control of Building Operations Act 1988 read with Clause (7) (2) of J & K Control of Building Operations regulations 1998, hereinafter for short 'Act' and 'Regulation' vide Order No. 215/ 99 dated 1-7-1999 of the Competent authority. Petitioner pleads that soon after he got knowledge of this sanction order he filed an appeal before the Appellate forum of Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal. The Tribunal on 11-9-1999 dismissed the Appeal. Petitioner challenging the sanction as also the above order of Appellate forum on the ground that the san...
Nawab Manzoor HussaIn Vs. State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Jul-24-2001
Reported in: AIR2002J& K1
ORDERSyed Bashir-ud-Din, J. 1. One Thakur S. Baldev Singh Samyal came in possession of the land referred in pleadings of parties at Rajbagh, Srinagar on allotment, on lease hold basis way back in June, 1937 for a period of 40 years. The said lessor S. Baldev Singh died in 1982 leaving behind his heirs. Residential house of S. Baldev Singh is on portion of this land. The ground floor of the house is with Gulmarg Winter Sports Project on rent. Despite the lease not being renewed and as per petitioner original lessor or his heirs not having applied for the same, it continues to be held over by succession-in-interest of S. Baldev Singh. Petitioner claims that he entered into an agreement with legal heir of said S. Baldev Singh for sale of the property in question and it was on this footing that the petitioner was allowed to occupy first floor of the residential building though this factual para 5 of the writ petition is refuted by respondents in reply. It is however, stated that Jagdev Sin...
State Vs. Amma Dagga and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Jul-21-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4480
Syed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Respondents accused faced trial under Section 148, 323, 302, and 149, R.P.C. in Sessions case 11/78 titled State v. Amma Dagga and others. The Sessions Judge Anantnag on conclusion of the trial dismissed the prosecution case after giving benefit of doubt to the accused. The accused were acquitted of the above charged offences. This judgment and order of acquittal came to be recorded by the trial Court of Sessions Judge Anantnag on March 23, 1985. State of Jammu and Kashmir through its Chief Prosecution Officer/Government Advocate has come up in appeal against the acquittal judgment.2. On 19-11-1977, accused led by Salam Wani and Amma Dagga are alleged to have pelted stones on the house of one Mohammad Ashan Bhat, EW, where deceased Mohammed Amin was also present. This happened in village Madargam Tehsil Kulgam. Accused formed an unlawful assembly with the object of causing death to complaint party and damage to their property. During pelting of stones as above,...
State Bank of India Vs. Trans Asia Tubes and Industries
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Jul-06-2001
Reported in: [2003]43SCL498(J& K)
ORDERTejinder Singh Doabia, J.1. One of the Directors of M/s. Trans Asia Tubes and Industries Ltd., has preferred this application in which a prayer has been made that the suit filed by the State Bank of India be dismissed as this has been filed in contravention of the provisions contained in Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956. Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956, on which reliance is being placed, is reproduced below:--'446. Suits stayed on winding up order--(1) When a winding up order has been made or the Official Liquidator has been appointed as provisional liquidator, no suit or the other legal proceeding shall be commenced, or if pending at the date of the winding up order, shall be proceeded with against the company, except by leave of the Court and subject to such terms as the Court may impose. (2) The Court which is winding up the company shall, notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, have jurisdiction to entertain or dispose of- ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›