Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1951CriLJ99
Harnam Singh, J.1. This order disposes of criminal Appeals nos. 623 and 682 of 1948 and Criminal Revision No. 180 of 1948.2. Piara Singh, son of Dalip Singh, caste Jat, resident of Mahal Khurd in Jullundur district, and Earn Singh son of Mahla Singh caste Jat, resident of Panch Malla in district Hissar, have been convicted under Sections 302 and 379, Penal Code, and sentenced to transportation for life each under Section 302, Penal Code, and to three yeats' rigorous imprisonment each under Section 379, Penal Code, Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently Piara Singh and Ram Singh appeal while the Crown has applied for the enhancement of the sentences imposed upon the appellants under Section 302, Penal Code,3. Briefly stated, the facts are that in the middle of October, 1947 Gurbachan Singh approver p, W. 14 was called to village Lambi Dhab by Bachan Singh of that village. He went there and on going to Lambi Dhab, be met Bam Singh and Piara Singh who were staying at the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1950HP30
Bannerji, J. 1. These are, an appeal by Sadhu Bam and Bam Swarup, father and son, defendants 2 and 3 and a cross-objection by Mohammad Ali, the plaintiff, from a judgment and decree dated 29th June 1943 of Shri J.N. Bhagat C. J., High Court, Nahan, in civil Appeal No. 2 of 2005. 2. The suit was brought by the plaintiff sometime in Samvat 2003. Defendant 1, Mohammad Khan, had obtained a contract from the Department of Public Works, Nahan, for constructing a part of Bainka Road. Defendants 2 and 3, father and son, were intere9ted in this contract. As a matter of fact, sometime later on, defendant l applied for sanction to the Public Works Department, to assign the benefit of the contract to defendants 2 and 3 and such sanction, it appears from the record, was granted. 3. It was alleged on behalf of the plaintiff that he had supplied labour, under instructions from the defendants, principally from defendant 1 and he had not been paid this amount either by defendant 1 or by defendants 2 an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1950HP33
ORDERBannerji, J.1. This is a reference made by the District Judge of Caamba under Section 100, Punjab Tenancy ACT, recommending that the decree dated 26th July 1949 of the Subordinate Judge, from which an appeal was taken to him, be registered as a decree of a revenue Court inasmuch as the suit was cognizable by a revenue Court. 2. The material facts, as appear from the pleadings and also from the judgment, are as follows: The plaintiff, Mt. Mama, widow of Laddakhi, commenced this suit for possession of land, measuring four acres one kanal and one marla recorded in Khata No. 43 and seven marlas of land, in Khata Nautor at page 26, in village, Melah, pargana Lihl. The defendant took this land from plaintiffs' husband and cultivated it, it is alleged by the plaintiff, OH half batai. In para. 2 of the plaint, the plaintiff, alleged that she had warned the defendant not to prepare land for Rabi crop for 2005 and give up possession of the land, which the defendant refused. 3. The defence w...
Tag this Judgment!