Himachal Pradesh Court August 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.
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Chhaju Ram and Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-13-1986
Reported in: AIR1987HP79
V.P. Bhatnagar, J. 1. The benefits which accrue to the owners of the acquired land or persons interested therein under the provisions of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act No. 68 of 1984) (for short, the amending Act of 1984) and particularly the transitional provisions incorporated in Section 30, ibid fall for consideration in these seven Regular First Appeals. 2. In all these cases, land was acquired for the purpose of constructing Pong Dam in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The controversy between the parties pertains to the market-value of the acquired land. It has been conceded by the learned counsel for the parties that the capitalised value of similar type of land stands finally determined by the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Shanti Devi, AIR 1983 SC 1190. Thus, there is no dispute that the amount awarded by the learned District Judge in each case has to be reduced by 25% as was done in Shanti Devi's case (supra). 3. The particulars of each case and the amount p...
Raghunath Dass and Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ671
V.P. Bhatnagar, J.1. Criminal liability in case of insect-damaged nd/or insect-infested articles of food under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 falls for determination in these revision petitions.2. At the admission stage of Criminal Revision No. 7 of 1983, it was urged that Sub-clauses (1) and (m) take out the case of primary food from the purview of Sub-clauses (f) of clause (ia) of Section 2 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as held in State of Haryana v. Rama Nand (1982) 84 Pun LR 649 : 1982 Cri LJ 1370. The Court was then of the view that important questions of law being involved, the case be placed before a Division Bench. For similar reasons, Criminal Revision No. 75 of 1983 and Criminal Revision No. 100 of 1983 were ordered to be heard along with Criminal Revision No. 7 of 1983. We proceed to dispose of all the above-mentioned three cases by this judgment.3. The facts of three cases are as follows.4. In Criminal...
Mohan Datt Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-08-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1677
ORDERR.S. Thakur, J.1. This criminal revision petition , is directed against the order in appeal of the learned Sessions Judge, dated March 12,1985, whereby the appeal of the revisionist Mohan Datt (hereinafter called as the accused) against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, dated October 3,1983, was dismissed with the modification that the substantive sentence of imprisonment was reduced from ' one year to six months under Section 7 read with Section 16(l)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate vide the aforesaid order had convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to undergo further R.I. for three months.2. The brief facts of the case are that on March 23, 1982, at about 9 a.m. when the Food Inspector, D. N. Kaushik was at Shogi in connection with his official duties, he found the accused in...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›