Himachal Pradesh Court May 1993 Judgments

Dr. Om Prakash Rawal Vs. Mr. Justice Amrit Lal Bahri

Court: Himachal Pradesh

ORDERDevinder Gupta, J.1. The defendant-petitioner has in his Civil Revision challenged the order passed on 30th Sept. 1992 by Mr. Inderjit Kaushik, Sub Judge 1st Class, Chandigarh. The Civil Revision was instituted in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, but it stood transferred to this court by virtue of an order passed by the Supreme Court on 1st Februray, 1993 in Transfer Petition (C) No. 623 and 624 of 1992 (Dr. Om Prakash Rawal v. Mr. Justice Amrit Lal Bahri).2. In order to appreciate the grievances of the petitioner, as made out in this revision petition and the dispose of this Civil Revision, it will be necessary to give a few facts.3. On 5th June, 1992 the plaintiff-respondent filed a suit in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Chandigarh against the defendant-petitioner, seeking a decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to hand over the vacant possession of House No. 124, Sector I6A, Chandigarh and for recovery of Rs. 1,000/- as damages for use and occupati...

Narata Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1994CriLJ491

ORDERD.P. Sood, J.1. This order shall dispose of all the criminal revision petitions, seven in number, as a common question of law and fact has arisen. Also, petitioner in all the cases is the same.2. The facts, in brief, are that in a criminal case State v. M. S. Khan and Ors., under Section 452 of the Penal Code, S/ Shri M. S. Khan, Sat Dev Singh, America Prashad, Chhaju Chauhan, Mehesh Prashad, Moti Lal and Harinder Chauhan were facing trial in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kandaghat, District Solan. The petitioner, Narata Ram had stood surety for each one of the seven accused and had executed the surety bond, undertaking that he would see that the accused appear on every date of hearing in the case in the Court and in case any default was made in that respect, he would be bound to pay Rs. 5000/- (Rupees five thousands) as penalty. All the seven accused have absconded and are not being served.3. A notice was, accordingly issued to the petitioner for the production...

Baldev Singh Vs. Smt. Darshani Devi and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993HP141

Devinder Gupta, J.1. The question of law, which can be said to have arisen for determination in this Second Appeal is that whether a co-owner can transfer a valid title in a specific portion of land owner which he is not in exclusive occupation.2. The plaintiff is the appellant, who has challenged the judgment and decree passed on 30th Sept. 1985, by District Judge, Solan and Sirmaur Districts at Nahan, allowing the appeal of the defendants-respondents and dismissing the plaintiffs suit for possession and thereby setting aside the judgment and decree passed on 28th February, 1984 by Sub Judge, Nahan, decreeing the plaintiffs suit for possession.3. On 5th June, 1981, a suit for possession of 65 square metres of land comprised in Khasra No. 120 and 137/9/2/2/2/1 as entered at Khewat No. 56 min, Khatauni No. 78 in Misal Haqiat Bandobast of Nahan town was filed by the plaintiff, on the basis of title alleging that a valid title to this part of the property had been acquired by him through ...

Smt. Ram Rakhi Vs. Smt. Atti and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1993HP137

Kamlesh Sharma, J.1. This regular second appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 10-10-1988 passed by the District Judge, Una whereby the appeal of the respondents/ plaintiffs was accepted, the decree and judgment dated 30-9-1985 of Sub Judge (I), Una was set aside and the suit of the respondents/plaintiffs was decreed for possession by redemption of mortgage. They were ordered to deposit the mortgage money within a period of two months. It was also directed that on deposit of the mortgage amount, the appellant/defendant will deliver possession of the suit land to the respondent/ plaintiffs.2. The suit of the respondents/plaintiffs was that one of them Smt. Atti was owner in possession of the suit land as stated in the heading of the plaint. The suit land consists of two parcels of land situated in two villages i.e. Bhalkoon and Baroa, which will hereinafter be referred to as villages 'A' and 'B'. The land in village 'A' is measuring 3 kanals 8 marlas and comprised in ...

State Bank of India Vs. Krishna Pottery Udyog Association and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1994HP90

ORDERD.P. Sood, J. 1. The plaintiff bank, a body corporate established under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 deals in advancing the loan to various persons who intend to run their business. Defendant No. 1 is one of such like industrial unit to whom loan to the extent of Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lakhs) (cash credit working capital loan) was sanctioned after observing codal formalities. Interest @ 15% per annum 1 1/2% below the State Bank of India advance rate, calculated on daily balances with quarterly rests in accordance with the practice and subject to enhancement by the Reserve Bank of India, was agreed to be paid by them to the plaintiff-bank. Defendant No. 1's firm is an Association of which defendants 2 to 8 including the President and Secretary were the member. Defendant No. 9 stood as a guarantor and in case of default, he agreed to pay the amount personally in accordance with the terms and conditions laid in guarantee deed Ex. PW-1/6 dated 10-3-1983. The defendants also executed...

Brig. J.S. Sivia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: (1994)ILLJ906HP

Kamlesh Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner was promoted to the acting rank of Brigadier on April 10, 1990 and since then he has been working as such. By letter dated March 4, 1992 (Annexure PD/1) he was informed that the competent authority had not approved the grant of substantive rank of Brigadier to him. In view of his not being deemed fit for appointment to the substantive rank of Brigadier, by letter dated July 17, 1992 (Annexure P-D), the Military Secretary to the Government of India asked the option of the petitioner, besides two others, to seek voluntary retirement as acting Brigadier or revert to lower substantive rank and retire in due course, as per the instructions contained in Army Head-quarter letter No. 29189/II/MS (X) dated February 23, 1986.2. Instead of exercising his option, the petitioner has knocked at the door of this Court by way of the present writ petition to challenge the letters dated March 4, 1992 and July 17, 1992 (Annexure P. D/l and P.D.) on the ground, inter a...

H.P. Financial Corporation Vs. Parveen Kumar and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1994HP120

ORDERD.P. Sood, J. The controversy in between the parties to the instant suit is confined only to the charging of penal interest, the issue regarding which is as under:1. Whether penal interest as charged by the plaintiff-Corporation is not payable to them by the defendants? O.P. Defendants.2. The plaintiff-Corporation is a Corporate Body established under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. Amongst other, it also indulges in advancement of the loan to the Industrial Units, and other persons to promote and expand industries in the State of Himachal Pradesh. The defendants for the purpose of promoting and expanding transport industry, applied for a loan and an amount of Rs. 2,22,000/- was sanctioned onthe terms and conditions mentioned in the deed of hypothecation, trust receipt and irrevocable power of attorney and guarantee-deed etc. The repayment of the loan was secured by hypothecation of the properties mentioned in para 8 of the plaint. Interest @ 61/2% above IDBI lending r...

Life Convict Karam Singh Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1993CriLJ3751

Bhawani Singh, A.C.J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court for release since he has completed 15 years 9 months as on 29-3-1993. This fact has been admitted in the reply-affidavit filed by Shri T. R. Mahajan, I.P.S. Inspector General of Prisons, Himachal Pradesh. According to respondent No. 2, the petitioner has not completed 14 years actual imprisonment as laid down under Section 433-A of Code of Criminal Procedure, his case cannot be taken for pre-mature release and sent to the Government for consideration and decision. The parole period cannot be counted for calculating 14 years jail sentence under Section 433-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. In order to substantiate the submission that parole period is to be counted, Shri Bhupender Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance on Supreme Court decision in AIR 1980 SC 2147: (1980 Cri LJ 1440) Maru Ram v. Union of India, wherein it has been held (at page 1467 of Cri LJ):'..........the expressi...

Daljit Singh Vs. S. Manmohan Singh and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 1993CriLJ3878

ORDERKamlesh Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, who claims himself to be the Secretary of the workers Union of the Village Papers Private Ltd., Mehatpur, (hereinafter called the Union'), has preferred this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 18th July, 1992 passed by the Sessions Judge, Chamba (Additional Sessions Judge, Una) in Criminal Revision No. 7 of 1991 filed by respondent Sardar Man Mohan Singh against the order dated 1st November, 1990 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, whereby he was summoned in a criminal case No. 16 of 1990.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was working as semi-skilled operator with Village Papers Private Ltd., 2 Industrial Area. Mehatpur (hereinafter called the Company'). In December, 1985, he had given demand notice, in his capacity as Secretary of the Union, regarding grievances of workmen members. Thereafter, the Company offered the post of General Supervisor t...