Himachal Pradesh Court November 1986 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Teju Vs. Bhadar and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1986
Reported in: AIR1987HP25
P.D. Desai, C.J.1. This case illustrates how a hyper technical approach to a case without regard to the realities of life and the primary consideration of doing substantial justice results in failure to exercise jurisdiction vested by law in the court and consequently causes miscarriage of justice.2. An appeal preferred by the appellant herein in the District Court was dismissed for default on Sept. 5, 1985. An application for restoration of the appeal was filed on Nov. 18, 1985. The application was filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation and there was a delay of about 44 days in the presentation of the application. The appellant stated in the application that the intimation with regard to the dismissal of the appeal was conveyed by his counsel under a letter dated Oct. 30, 1985 which reached him only on Nov. 10, 1985, and that he had instituted the application soonest thereafter. The application was dismissed primarily on the ground that it was barred by limitation and that n...
Smt. Kamla Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-28-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1838
T.R. Handa, J.1. Both, Criminal Appeal No. 64 of 1986 and Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 1986, have been filed under Section 449(2), Cr. P.C. and are directed against the same order of the Sessions Judge passed on 3rd July, 1986, under Section 446, Cr.P.C. It would, therefore, be convenient to dispose both these appeals by this common order.2. The material facts are like this : Shri Ghera, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 1986, was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the offence falling under Section 61 of the Punjab Excise Act by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nurpur. Feeling aggrieved, he preferred an appeal against his aforesaid conviction and sentence before the Sessions Judge. Along with the appeal he made an application under Section 389, Cr.P.C. praying for suspension of the sentence imposed upon him. The appeal was admitted by the Sessions Judge on 11-10-1985. On the same day the learned Session...
Didar Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-19-1986
Reported in: AIR1987HP42
P.D. Desai, C.J.1. The learned single Judge has made the following observations in the judgment under appeal :-'The petitioner, though initially had challenged the vires of the rules found at Annexure-J concerning the recruitment to the post of Consolidation Officer, at the time of hearing of the petition, restricted his attack only to the order of promotion of respondents Nos. 4 to 6 made under such Rules. The only ground on which the order was attacked was that the promotion of respodents Nos. 4 tp 6 had been made withoukconsidering the claim of, the petitioner who admittedly fell in the field of choice for promotion to such posts.' (Underlining supplied)2. The learned single Judge examined the validity of the ground with reference to the original official record and having found the same to be wholly without substance rejected the writ petition. The decision is unassailable on this point.3. The learned counsel for the appellant (original petitioner) seeks to raise before us a host o...
Chinti Vs. Harminder
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1986
Reported in: AIR1987HP56
T.R. Handa, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal arises out of Civil Suit No. 79 of 1967 instituted in the Court of Sub Judge, Una, by the present appellant, hereinafter called 'the plaintiff'. The relief claimed in the suit was for possession of different parcels of land measuring in all 74 Kanals 16 Marias and as detailed in the decree sheet of the Court below. The suit was decreed by the trial Court but on appeal that decree was reversed and the suit dismissed by the District Judge.2. The following pedigree table, the correctness of which is not in dispute, would help in appreciating the controversy involved in this appeal : -- Kharkhu _____________|________________ | | | Chandu Kamal Likhu (Died issueless)| | Dalipu=Chinti-pliff (Window) Balanda | | Babu Ram (Died issueless) Harminder (Defendant) 3. The land forming subject matter of this litigation is comprised in four different Khewats, being Khewat Nos. 46, 11, 34 and 120. Khewat No. 46 was jointly owned by Dalipu and Balanda in equ...
Himachal Road Transport Corporation Vs. Mani Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1986
Reported in: I(1988)ACC77
P.D. Desai, C.J.1. The only point which has been urged in support of the appeal relates to the quantum of compensation.2. The evidence of the first respondent (claimant) is to the effect that he was earning Rs. 750/- per month by way of salary and that he was being provided by his employer with two free meals and tea every day. The Tribunal computed the value of the aforesaid perquisites at Rs. 150/-per month and added the said amount to the sum of Rs. 750/- and accordingly determined the total monthly income of the first respondent at Rs. 900/-. On the aforesaid basis and taking into consideration the medical evidence, which had assessed the permanent disability at approximately 50%, the loss of earning capacity was assessed at 50%. In terms of money, the loss of earning capacity was computed at Rs. 450/- per month, that is, Rs. 5400/- per annum, on the aforesaid footing. In view of the fact that the claimant-respondent was aged about 32 at the material time, the multiplier of 18 was ...
The Kailash District Co-operative Marketing and Supply Federation Ltd. ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-07-1986
Reported in: AIR1988HP1
T.R. Handa, J.1. This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 21st November, 1980, recorded by a single Judge of this Court allowing Civil Writ Petition No. 148 of 1971 filed at the instance of the present respondent No. 1, Shri Sher Singh Mehta. Since the controversy surviving at this stage between the parties pertains to a pure question of law, it is not considered necessary to give the factual details leading to this appeal. The following short narration would suffice for appreciating the subsisting controversy:2. The appellant in this case is a society registered under the Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1969, hereinafter called 'the Act'. Respondent No. 1, the writ petitioner was a member of this society. In the year 1965, respondent No. 1 supplied a consignment of potatoes to the appellant-society at the rates which were mutually agreed upon. Subsequently a dispute arose between the appellant and respondent No. 1 concerning the price of the said cons...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›