3.1.2006 Present: Mr. R.K.Gautam, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Anurag Sharma, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Bhuvnesh Sharma and Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Advocates, for respondents No.1(a), 1(c), 2 and 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has submitted that he has got the instructions to challenge the finding of the learned District Judge on Issue No.5. He has prayed for a short date for arguing this appeal and he has submitted that in the meanwhile he will be challenging the same. Adjourned to 13.3.2006. In the meanwhile the respondents may challenge the finding of the learned District Judge in Issue No.5, if so advised in accordance with law. January 3, 2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J. Cr.A.No.526 of 2005 3.1.2006 Present: Mr. N.K.Thakur, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Ashutosh Burathoki, Addl.A.G., for the respondent.. Cr.MP No.573 of 2005 The case pertains to the recovery of 5 KGs poppy husk from two persons. Both the accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 15 of the N.D.P.S. Act and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- each. The appeal filed by the appellants has since been admitted. By way of present application, the applicants- appellants are seeking the grant of bail during the pendency of their appeal. Admittedly, the provisions of Section 37 of the N.D.P.S. Act are not applicable in this case since the recovery is less than commercial quantity. After hearing learned counsel and perusing the record and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, it is directed that the applicants-appellants shall be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Judge. Copy dasti. January 3, 2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J. CR No.10 of 2005 3.1.2006 Present: Mr .Pankaj Sharma, Advocate, vice counsel for the petitioner. Mr.R.K.Bawa, Senior Advocate, with Mr.Raj Pal Thakur, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 7 and for the proposed LRs. of respondent No.1. CMP(M) Nos.563 & 564 of 2005 The learned vice counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that he has already filed an appropriate application in this court on 2.1.2006 with a copy to the learned counsel for the respondents. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents prays for a short date to file reply to this application. Adjourned to 13.1.2006 on which date the aforesaid applications and the application filed by the petitioner shall be considered. January 3,2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J. RFA No.188 of 2004 3.1.2006 Present: Mrs Devyani Sharma, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2 Mr. Kuldip Singh, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate, for respondent No.3. The learned counsel appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 has filed an application today in court, placing on record copy of the Jamabandi showing the ownership of Smt. Dolma in the acquired land. The office is directed to register the said application and assign number to this application. The learned counsel appearing for newly added respondent prays for a short date to file reply and to seek instructions. Adjourned to 7.3.2006. January 3,2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J. 3.1.2006 Present: Mr .Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Pt. Om Parkash, Advocate, for the respondent. CMP No. 216 of 2004 At the request made by the learned counsel for the respondent, adjourned to 10.3.2006 for consideration. In the meanwhile, reply may be filed to this application by the said date. In the meanwhile, the operation of the order dated 22.3.2003 shall remain stayed, till further orders. January 3, 2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J. CS No.72 of 1982 3.1.2006 Present: Mr. Kuldip Singh, Sr. Advocate, with Mr.Karan Singh Kanwar, Advocate, for the plaintiff. None for the defendants. This suit has been received on remand from the Division Bench. A perusal of the record would show that the present suit is for the recovery of Rs.8,60,492/- and the value of the suit for the purpose of court fees and jurisdiction has also been assessed at Rs.8,60,492/-. By virtue of Notification No.HHC/PJ/1-2001/5935 dated 1.4.2005 issued by this Court, the pecuniary jurisdictional value of the District Judge/Additional District Judge has been enhanced from Rs.5 lacs upto Rs.10 lacs. In this view of the matter, the present suit becomes triable by the District Judge/Addl District Judge. In view of the above, the present suit is transferred to the Court of District Judge, Solan for further proceedings. The learned District Judge may either try the case himself or may transfer it to the Addl. District Judge at his option. It is further made clear that since the defendants are not represented before me today, the learned District Judge/ Addl. District Judge, before proceeding further in the matter, shall issue notice to the defendants in accordance with law. CS No.72 of 1982 Plaintiff through its counsel is directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Solan on 28.2.2006 for further proceedings in accordance with law. Copy of this order be given dasti, as prayed. January 3,2006 (g) ( V.M.Jain ), J.