Himachal Pradesh Court November 1987 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 Punjab and anr. Vs. Ram Kumar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-1987
Reported in: I(1988)ACC413
P.D. Desai, C.J.1. The learned Advocate General fairly stated that he may not have much to say so far as the rinding on the issue of negligence . is concerned. The challenge on his part was confined to the quantum of compensation as assessed, namely, Rs. 42,000/-.2. True it is that the compensation does not appear to have been assessed strictly on legal basis. However, even if the compensation due and payable is worked out afresh on the application of known principles, the result will not be favourable to the appellants. This is amply clear from what follows.3. The deceased was aged about 18 at the time of the fatal accident. He had cleared the matriculation examination with 50% marks in all the subjects except science. He is alleged to have engaged himself in the business of distribution of milk and newspapers while prosecuting studies and to have earned an income of Rs. 500/- to Rs. 600/- per month. This part of the evidence has rightly not been accepted by the Tribunal. However, eve...
Ganesh Dutt and ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-1987
Reported in: AIR1989HP35
P.D. Desai, C.J. 1. The location of a Government School at one site or another is not a matter which ordinarily calls for interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction. In an exceptional case, however, the Court may be left with no alternative but to interpose in order to check arbitrariness in the administrative decision taken in that regard, especially when it appears that there are no defined policy, norms or guidelines governing the selection, of the site or if there be any, they are not being followed, and that consequently changes take place in the location of a Government school as a result of conflicting directions emanating from high quarters from time to time without due regard to all the relevant factors. The facts set out hereinbelow, which speak for themselves, justify the Court's intervention in the present case.2. The Gram Panchayat Ratwari comprises about 15 revenue villages. A Government Primary School had been functioning within its local limits at village Ratwari...
Sant Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-13-1987
Reported in: AIR1989HP15
ORDERP.D. Desai, C.J. 1. The petitioner is the occupant of premises described as set No. 37/1-4, Nabha Estate, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as 'the premises'). It is not in dispute that Nabha Estate was the property of the erstwhile State of Nabha and that after the merger of the Nabha State with the Union of India it vested in the erstwhile PEPSU State and that the petitioner was inducted as a tenant by the erstwhile PEPSU State. The property then passed hands and was vested successively in the Punjab State, the Union Territory and ultimately in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The petitioner admittedly continued as a tenant of the premises till Mar 31, 1964. The last agreement 6f lease executed between the Governor of Punjab and the petitioner for a period of one year commencing from April l, 1963 and ending with Mar. 31, 1964 is on the record. Under the said lease, the rent was payable at the rate of Rs. 18.75 per month inclusive of water tax and excess water charges. Two of the co...
Gulab Singh and ors. Vs. Smt. Dilbaru and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-06-1987
Reported in: AIR1989HP23
V.P. Gupta, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved from the judgment and decree dt. 20-5-1978 passed by Additional District Judge, Kulu, the appellants (hereinafter the plaintiffs) have filed this appeal.2. The facts are that Gulab Singh, j Girdhari Lal and Hira Lal are the sons of Khub Ram. Gulab Singh and Girdhari Lal, (hereinafter the plaintiffs) filed a suit for possession of 12 Biswas of land in Khasra No. 1469 (disputed land) situate in Phati Parli of Tehsil Kulu alleging that they along with their brother Hira Lal (hereinafter defendant 2) were owners and in possession of this land. Defendant 2 was living separately from the plaintiffs and he. in collusion with Dot Ram (hereinafter defendant 1) entered into a fictitious transaction of exchange with defendant 1, by which defendant 1 agreed to give in exchange one half share of Khasra No. 1480 (measuring 1 Bigha 5 Biswas) of Phati Parli to defendant 2 and defendant 2 also agreed to give disputed Khasra No. 1469 todefendant 1. Mutation No. 782 of...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›