Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on : Nov-27-1998
Reported in : 1999CriLJ4967
..... intention of the person who has executed the conveyance in the latter case. the principle underlying the former case is also statutorily recognised in section 82 of the indian trusts act, 1882 air 1957 sc 49, relied on.the principle governing the determination of the question whether a transfer is a benami transaction or not may be summed ..... which the prosecution misreably failed to collect. it is absurd to presume it a circumstance for categorising the property as benami, that appeal filed by ajay gupta was amended and the petitioner and two others referred to above were substituted as appellants. this is factually incorrect and speaks volume of non-application of mind. the petitioner filed ..... the name of the petitioner figures in the fir.why the appeal was filed by ajay kumar gupta?vi) why the appeal filed by ajay kumar gupta was amended and the petitioner and two other owners were substituted as appellants.22. the name of the petitioner does not figure in the fir. the appeal has also not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on : Apr-22-1998
Reported in : AIR1998J& K84
..... applicable. it may not be out of place to mention here that section 5 of the indian limitation act does not exclude the applications for readmission of appeals filed beyond time, but the j. & k. limitation act specifies only six categories to which section 5 of the act is applicable and where delay can be condoned. admittedly, there is no room for entertaining an ..... hand, has relied on number of decided cases, including jana v. ghulam nabi, air 1952 j & k 12. we have gone through the judgment. the point involved was that certain amendments to the tenancy law had been made and were in force when the case was heard by the board. no question based on such ..... amendment was argued. the court held that it is too late to entertain absolutely a new ground on which the decree of the high court is sought to be reversed in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on : Mar-23-1998
Reported in : AIR1999J& K1
..... fell within any of the provisions of section 100(i) (a to d) of the code of civil procedure, 1977 (1920 a.d.), as it stood prior to its amendment on 15-8-1983, therefore, this court may not interfere with such findings of fact.24. in support of this submission, learned counsel for the defendant further urged that ..... the lifetime of my grand-father....witness claims to have employed two persons in the shop but had not got their names registered with the authorities under the shops establishment act.15. in order to prove the will (ex. pw-cl) produced by sanjay kumar pw, plaintiff has also examined charanjit la! hakim and amar nath. as per ..... beforethe trial court.10. after referring to the evidence on record as well as to provisions of section 11(l)(h), jammu and kashmir houses and shops rent control act, learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submitted that defendant raised no specific plea of comparative hardship and/or that the premises were not bona fide required by his client. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on : Mar-17-1998
Reported in : 1998CriLJ4289
..... the service. one of the grounds for detention is that the detenue is involved in fir 28/97 under section 489, 121-a, 122 rpc 10/11 criminal law amendment act, 13 vlap act registered at police station nowhatta and fir no. 203/92 under section 302, rpc 3/25, iaa, 3(1) tada, registered at police station shaheed-gunj. in fir no ..... passed by district magistrate srinagar (annexure-a) is challenged in this writ petition under section 103 of the constitution of jammu and kashmir state corresponding to article 226 of the indian constitution on the following grounds :-the detenue asstt. executive engineer, srinagar municipality was picked up by b.s.f-. 106 bn. on the intervening night of 3/4 march, 1997 ..... magistrate, srinagar after report was submitted to the magistrate that he is involved in fir 28/97 under section 489(b), 121, 121(a), 122, 10/1 1,13 vlap act. however, he was not released. he continued to be in detention with j.i.c. srinagar till 10-5-1997. it was only on 1 1-5-97 that he .....
Tag this Judgment!