Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H97
Weston, C.J.1. This matter termed a civil revision has come before us from an order of Mr. Justice Kapur made on the 22nd of November, 1950. The learned Judge considered that the question arising before him should be determined by a Division Bench. The question is Thus:'Whether the Rana of Koti, who by a notification of the Punjab Government made on the 1st of January, 1909, under Section 133 of Civil P. C., was exempted from personal appearance in Court is still so exempted after the coming into force of the Constitution.'The circumstances giving rise to this question are that an interpleader suit was filed against the Rana and against his grandmother by a tenant. This tenant, who was a Muslim, afterwards went to Pakistan and the Rana at his own request was substituted as plaintiff against his grandmother defendant, the question in dispute being of course title to the property. After issues it appears the defendant applied that the plaintiff Rana be summoned to admit or deny certain d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H39
Bhandari, J.1. This is a reference by the learned District Judge of Delhi for the confirmation of the decree 'nisi' granted to the petitioner lor the dissolution of her marriage with the respondent.2. The petitioner, Joan Bernal Smith, was married to the respondent, Geoffery Charles Thomas, by the Registrar of Marriages at Allahabad on the 19th March, 1941. The respondent was eraployed in the Locomotive Department of the East Indian Railway at the time of his marriage but he joined the Indian army shortly thereafter and was transferred first to Kanpur and then to Assam and Java. He returned to Delhi on leave preparatory to demobilisation in December, 1946, and lived with the petitioner till the 4th April, 1947, On the latter date he went to Lucknow with the ostensible object of seeing his parents who were living there. He never came back. The petitioner addressed several communications to him but was unable to elicit a single line in reply. In May, 1950, Mr. Mathias, a friend of the re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H99; [1952]22CompCas146(P& H)
Kapur, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 202 of the Indian Companies Act against an order passed by Mr. M. R. Bhatia, District. Judge, Ludbiana, dated the 30th November 1950.2. On the application of Amrit Rai Sood one of the respondents in the present case, the Chitra Productions Ltd., was ordered to be wound up by this Court on the 20th December, 1948. In this application Amrit Rai Sood claimed to be a creditor of the company for over a lac and a half of rupees which was due to him on account of the balance 'due under a financing agreement duly carried out and amount paid' by him. In spite of notice having been served in the usual manner there was no appearance for either the Company or anybody else and the Company was as I have said before ordered to be wound up. The proceedings were then transferred to the District Judge, Ludhiana, who appointed Shri Krishan Kant Jain, an Advocate of Ludhiana, as the Official Liquidator.3. On the 10th January, 1950, Amrit Rai Sood made an applica...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H181
Kapur, J. 1. In this plaintiff's appeal against a judgment and decree of District Judge, Maharaj Kishore allowing the appeal and remanding the case for trial of other issues the sole point for determination is whether the transaction in dispute amounts to a mortgage by way of conditional sale or an out and out sale. The relationship of the parties is given in the pedigree-table which Is as follows: SIRI KISHAN DASS ____________________________|__________________________________ | | | | | Jaigopal Ram Gopal Ram Parshad Parmanand Girdhari Lal | __________|_____________ Pat Ram | | ____________________________|___ Mam Raj Kalu Ram | | | | ____|____ ____|_______ Matram Makhan Lal Dalip Singh Sant Lal= | | | | Deft. 1. Deft. 2. Deft. 3. widow Mt. Misri Hans Raj Mani Ram Dhan Ram Dev Raj Deft. 4. Pltf. Daft. 5. Deft. 6. Deft. 7.2. Ram Parshad's branch had earned on business under the name of firm Hardwari Mal-Pat Ram and Parma Nand's branch under the name of firm Kalu Ram-Mam Raj. On the 5t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H140
ORDERWeston, C.J. 1. The applicant one Mangal Mal, a Halwai of Nurpur in the Kangra District, was prosecuted before the Additional District Magistrate, Dharamsala, under Section 13(1)(a) of the Punjab Pure Food Act. He was convicted on the 26th of June 1950 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- or in default to undergo two months' rigorous imprisonment. He appealed to the Sessions Court and his appeal was dismissed by the Additional sessions Judge on the 2nd of January 1951.2. The finding of fact arrived at by both the Courts is that on the 31st of January 1950 the Food Inspector took a sample of oil which the accused was said to have exposed for sale at his shop as Sarson oil. The sample was sent to the Public Analyst who reported that it consisted wholly of linseed oil.3. Section 13 of the Punjab Pure Food Act, 1929, so far as material is as follows:'13(1) No person shall: (a) sell any adulterated food unless he has complied with such rules as may be prescribed in this behalf;' Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H214
Soni, J.1. Dara Singh 'alias' Dari and his brother Jndar Singh along with two others were sent up to take their trial for having committed the murder of Sardara Singh on the 19th of October, 1950, at Dulchipur. They were committed to take their trial by Mr. Hardayaj, Singh, Magistrate 1st Class and the trial was held by Mr. Gurdjal Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. The learned Judge found Dara Singh and Indar Singh guilty under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced Dara Singh to death and Indar Singh to transportation for life. He found that the case against the companions of these persons was not proved and gave them the benefit of the doubt and equitted them. This order of the AdditionalSessions Judge was passed on the 26th of March, 1951, whereupon the convicts appealed to this Court and the case was also sent for confirmation of the sentence of death under the provisions of Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The story against the appellants was simpl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H53
ORDERKapur, J.1. This is a rule directed against the Additional District Magistrate of Ferozepore to show cause why this case should not be transferred from his Court to a Court of competent jurisdiction in another District.2. The petitioner was a Naib Tahsildar, (Grow More Food) at Zira and it is alleged that an offence of corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and Section 161, Penal Code, was committed by the petitioner on 27-4-1951. A raiding party consisting of the Additional Superintendent of Police Mr. Tir-lochan Singh, Resident Magistrate Zira Mr. Udham Singh, Tahsildar Mr. Sant Singh and Sub-Inspector Iqbal Singh of Zira, and some other private persons are alleged to have found one Bhagwan Singh passing a currency note of Rs. 100/- to the petitioner at Makhu. On 28-4-1951 the petitioner was arrested and he was suspended on 2-5-1951 as from 28-4-1951. On the 2nd May the Commissioner of Jullundur Division passed an order by which he allowed the petitioner to dra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H158
ORDERHarnam Singh, J.1. In C. O. No. 128 of I950 and C. O. No. 136 of 1951 it is said that once it is established that a Banking Company is unable to pay its debts the Court has no power to sanction a scheme of arrangement under Section 153 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, hereinafter referred to as the Act, in relation to the affairs of that Banking Company.2. In arguments Counsel for the objectors rely upon the provisions of Section 38 (1) of the Banking Companies Act, 1949. Section 38 (1) reads: '38 (1) Without prejudice to the provisions contained in Section 162 or Section 271 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (VII of 1913), and without prejudice to its powers under Section 37, the Court shall order the winding up of a banking company if it is unable to pay its debts and the Court shall also order the winding up of a banking company if the Reserve Bank applies in this behalf to the Court.'3. Now, it is said that Section 38 (1) of the Banking Companies Act must be understood to ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H109
ORDERSoni, J. 1. A suit was brought by Messrs Bhajan Singh Hardit Singh & Company of Delhi in the Court of a Subordiante Judge, Delhi against Messrs. Charan Das & Sons of Amritsar for the recovery of Rs. 1,500/-.2. After the plaintiffs had put in the plaint they tried to serve the defendants, but the defendants could not be served and substituted service was ordered. On the 28th April 1949 the Court's order was that substituted service had been effected and that there was no appearance on behalf of the defendants in Court, and ex parte proceedings were ordered to be taken against them and the case was put up for hearing for the 10th May 1949. On the 29th April 1949 an application was put in on behalf of the defendants by Daulat Ram Tandon, the proprietor of the defendants, urging, on various grounds, that the ex parte proceedings should be set aside. He stated that he had left Amritsar and had taken up business in Bombay long before the institution of the suit and the plaintiffs were f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1952P& H124
Soni, J.1. This is an application made by one Jagan Nath praying for a writ of habeas corpus for his release on the ground that he was being illegally detained by an order of the District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur.2. The facts relating to the case are that the District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur, passed an order under Section 3 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, ordering Jagan Nath to be detained on the ground that his activities were prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and' services essential to the community and the public at large. The detenue was arrested on the 18th of July 1951 and the grounds of his detention were supplied to him the next day, i.e. the 19th July. The grounds stated;'(a) that he sold soda ash to (1), Diwan Chand, Committee Bazaar, Hoshiarpur, (2) Dharam Pall of Bahadurpur, and' (3) Muni Lal of Bahadurpur, several times during the last three or four months at Re. 1/- per seer whereas its controlled rate was annas nine per seer;(b) that he had been selling soda...
Tag this Judgment!