Himachal Pradesh Court July 1974 Judgments

S.D. Bakshi Vs. P.L. Morada

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1974HP63

D.B. Lal, J.1. This is an application for a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 133 of the Constitution. The usual allegation is that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and that in the opinion of the High Court it should be held that the said question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.2. It is abundantly clear from the observation of their Lordships in Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Ptg. Co. Ltd. v. Ram Tahel Ramnand, (1972) 1 SCC 898 - (AIR 1972 SC 1598 = 1972 Lab IC 864) that the word 'certify' used in the Article suggests, that the High Court is expected to apply its mind before certifying the case to be fit for appeal. The proper test for determining, whether a substantial question of law of general importance is involved would be whether it is of general public importance or whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties and if so, whether it is either open to question in the sense that ...

National Rice and Dal Mills and ors. Vs. Suraj Singh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

ORDERR.S. Pathak, C.J.1. This is a defendants' revision petition against an order dated September 12. 1973, passed by the learned Senior Subordinate Judge, Mandi rejecting his application under Order 11, Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The learned Senior Subordinate Judge considered an affidavit necessary in support of the application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and as no such affidavit was filed he rejected the application. Now, there can be no dispute that it is for the Court to be satisfied that a case exists for granting the relief claimed in such application. If the court considers that an affidavit is necessary for this purpose it is entitled to require the party to file such affidavit. It is also evident from Form No. 6 in Appendix 'C' to the Code that an affidavit is contemplated when, an application is made under Order 11 Rule 14 In the present case, it does not appear that any attempt was made to file an affidavit. In the circumstances, th...

Ashwani Kumar Vs. the State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Thakur, J. 1. This application under Article 133 of the Constitution of India for a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court has been filed by Shri Ashwani Kumar against the judgment of this court, dated 30th November, 1973, whereby his civil writ petition No. 177 of 1972 under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the selection and admission of respondents 4 and 5 and the rejection of his admission to the first year of the M. B. B. S. class to the Medical College by respondents 1 to 3 had been dismissed.2. The petitioner had on 25th August, 1972, applied for the admission to the first year of the M. B. B. S. Course for the 1972-73 Session against a general seat. The time fixed for receipt of applications for admission to the Medical College was 30th August, 1972. It appears that the petitioner made another application on 12th September, 1972, for admission to the M. B. B. S. Course against one of the two seats reserved for wards of political sufferers and persons ...

Surinder Singh Vs. Inder Sain

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1974CriLJ1361

ORDERD.B. Lal, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by Surinder Singh against the order dated February 28, 1974. of the learned Sessions Judge, Simla passed in a case under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The facts giving rise to the present revision petition are, that one Inder Sain filed a complaint before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 107 and the usual allegation was that there was apprehension of breach of peace from the direction of Surinder Singh, the present petitioner, and as such he should be bound over under that section to keep peace for a period settled by the Court. As required under law, the learned Magistrate being of opinion that there was sufficient ground for proceeding prepared a preliminary order and asked the petitioner Surinder Singh to show cause as to why he should not be ordered to execute a bond to keep peace and not to disturb the public tranauillity. It appears, Surinder Singh filed some application before the Sub-Divisional Ma...

Registrar of Companies Vs. New Valley View Transport Company (Pvt.) Lt ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: [1975]45CompCas210(HP)

R.S. Pathak, C.J. 1. This is a petition under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956, by the Registrar of Companies for the winding-up of the New Valley View Transport Company Private Ltd.2. New Valley View Transport Company Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ' the respondent-company ') is a private compyny limited by shares. It was incorporated on December 12, 1948, uader the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Originally the registered office of the company was situated at Pathankot in Punjab, but with effect from October 29, 1966, it has been moved to Dharamsala, Himachal Pradesh. The nominal capital of the respondent-company is Rs. 2,00,000, and the amount of capital paid-up or credited as paid-up is Rs. 85,500. According to the memorandum of association of the respondent-company one of the main objects of the company is to act as carriers of passengers and goods. The original board of directors of the company included Sbri V. P. Narula and Shri Harnam Singh, and after their resig...