Himachal Pradesh Court December 1996 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.
Amar Singh and ors. Vs. Tara Dutt
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ3391
R.L. Khurana, J.1.This Regular Second Appeal by the plaintiffs have been directed against the judgment and decree dated 1-8-1988 of the learned Additional District Judge (I), Shimla, reversing the judgment and decree dated 17-3-1987 of the learned Sub Judge 1st Class (I), Shimla.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case giving rise to the present appeal are these. On the basis of the report made by the defendant to the police, the plaintiffs were prosecuted for the offence Under Section 147, 504 and 447, Indian Penal Code and were acquitted by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla on 5-5-1983. A suit was thereafter filed by the plaintiffs for damages on account of malicious prosecution, it was averred that they were prosecuted by the defendant without reasonable and probable cause and that the defendant acted maliciously. Though the plaintiffs alleged that they suffered damages to the extent of Rs. 50.05/-, they confined their claim only to the extent of Rs. 6,000/-.3. The defen...
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Vinod Bali
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-31-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ1284
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. The Himachal Road Transport Corporation which is the owner of the bus involved in the accident and driver of the bus are the appellants in this appeal. The accident took place on 6.4.1989. The respondent herein was driving the scooter with his friend on pillion. When the scooter reached near Knolls Wood, Chhota Shimla and it was going uphill, the bus driven by the appellant No. 2 hit the scooter throwing out the respondent about 10-15 feet away. The respondent became unconscious immediately and suffered multiple injuries whereas the pillion rider escaped unhurt. The respondent filed an application for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act on the ground that the bus was driven by the appellant No. 2 in a rash and negligent manner and, therefore, both the appellants were liable to pay the compensation. The respondent claimed a total amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- by way of compensation without specifying the various heads under which such amount was claimed. In the pe...
State of H.P. Vs. Sher Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-30-1996
Reported in: 1998CriLJ3191
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. This appeal is at the instance of the State and is directed against the judgment dated 15-6-1985 passed by Special ide, Shimla in case No. 13-/7/1983, whereby the respondents were acquitted of the charges under Sections 379/411/420/467/468/471/ 167/218/109/34/120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.2. The prosecution case as disclosed from the judgment of the Special Judge may be briefly stated as under:3. During the investigation of case FIR No. 69/ 1977 of Police Station, Chopal by Shri Sukh Ram the then D.S.P., it came to light that respondents Mohar Singh and Jhina Singh had felled and removed trees from the Government land in connivance with the officials of Revenue and Forest Department. On such conspiracy having come to light, a report was accordingly made at Police Station, Chopal by the above said D.S.P. On the basis of the report First Information Report No. 114 of 1977 came to be registered and the...
Shamla Devi Vs. Surjit Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-1996
Reported in: AIR1998HP32
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. Appellant, hereinafter referred to as the wife' has preferred this appeal against the judgment passed by Shri Janeshwar Goel, District Judge, Una District Una. Vide judgment dated 3-5-1995, the Court below has dismissed the petition of the wife filed by her against the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the husband) for annulment of her marriage by a decree of nullity on the ground that the marriage between the parties has not been consummated, owing to the impotence of the husband as per Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. Facts which are not in dispute are that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on 30-11-1992 at Village Katohar Kalan, Tehsil Amb, District Una and the parties lived together up to 12-12-1993 at Village Bhanjal, the native village of the husband. Case of the wife further as pleaded before the trial Court was that the husband refused to cohabit upon wife and showed his ignorance a...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Seema Bhup and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ1147
R.L. Khurana, J.1. By virtue of this judgment, we propose to dispose of the above noted appeal and cross-objections arising out of award dated 5.10.1985 of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla, hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal', made under Section 110-A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.2. In an accident which took place on 14.6.1981 at about 3.30 p.m. in the Park area of Khalini, involving truck No. HPS 2374, grievous bodily injuries were sustained by respondent No. 1, Seema Bhup, hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant'.3. At the relevant time, the claimant was a minor of about 8 years of age. She has attained majority during the pendency of the present appeal before this Court.4. The claimant approached the learned Tribunal under Section 110-A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/- for the bodily injuries sustained by her in the accident. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the owner and driver respectively of the truck HPS 2374, while ...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jagtar Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ1074
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. These petitions are under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Though originally Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code was also quoted, on an objection by the office, counsel agreed to delete that provision and confined the petition to Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is submitted that as the compensation awarded is below Rs. 10,000/-, no appeal is maintainable and consequently the correctness of the award could be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence, these revision petitions are taken up for hearing.2. These petitions are filed by the insurance company which disputes its liability to pay compensation on the ground that the person who was driving the vehicle involved in the accident was one who did not have a driving licence to drive a vehicle. According to the insurance company it was only the cleaner of the truck who was driving the vehicle at the relevant time who did not possess a driving licence even according to hi...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Lalita Prabhakar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-19-1996
Reported in: 1998ACJ1124
R.L. Khurana, J.1. The above noted appeal and cross-objections arising out of the award dated 27.7.88 of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III), Kangra at Dharamshala, hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal, under Section 110-A, Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, are proposed to be disposed of by this single judgment.2. In an accident involving motor cycle No. PBO 5575 and an army truck bearing tag No. 257 and a bus belonging to Himachal Road Transport Corporation bearing registration No. HPK 5713, which took place on 25.1.1987 at about 2 p.m. at Thakurdwara near Palampur, one A.D. Prabhakar, son of Khushi Ram of Dehra, District Kangra, had sustained multiple grievous injuries and he died while being carried to P.G.I., Chandigarh.3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 before this Court are the widow and minor daughters of the deceased A.D. Prabhakar. They are being hereinafter referred to as the claimants.4. Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 are the driver and owner, respectively, of the motor cycle, whil...
Dr. S.R. Mehrotra Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-1996
Reported in: AIR1997HP51
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. I. PREFACE :This petition was filed by a Professor of H.P. University who was in service, at the time when it was filed, in Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla. The prayer in the petition is to declare the amendments made by the Himachal Pradesh University Amendment) Act. 1983 to Himachal Pradesh University Act, 1970 as illegal, ultra vires, prompted by wrong information, based on erroneous presumptions, a fraud on the Legislature, inconsistent with and repugnant to the objects of the principal Act, violative of the basic structure and essential features of the constitution of the University, a source of confusion and contradictions, lending to convert an autonomous institution into an agency or instrumentality of the State, harmful to the public interest, and quash the same. There is also another prayer to declare illegal and ultra vires the amendments in Sections 8 and 12 of the First Statutes of the University brought in by a notification No.3-l/76-HPU(Genl)Vol...
Eicher Tractors Ltd. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-16-1996
Reported in: (1998)IIILLJ13HP
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. The writ petition is taken up for consideration. It is directed against the Award passed by the Labour Court on June 4, 1996. The order of reference made by the Government refers only one question to the Labour Court which reads as follows:--'Whether the termination of Vinod Kumar Walia, Assistant Engineer on September 14, 1991 during continuation of probationary period by the Managing Director acting on behalf of the respondent of his unsuitability is legal and valid. If not to what relief is he entitled to?'2. However, the Labour Court proceeded to frame two issues in the following terms:--1. Whether the termination of Sh. Vinod Kumar is illegal and unjustified? If so, to what relief the petitioner is entitled to? OPP 2. Whether the petitioner was on probation at the time of his termination. If so, to what effect? OPR 3. It is seen therefrom that the second issue was beyond the purview of reference made to; the Labour Court. The Labour Court could have only con...
Jagat Ram Vs. Himachal Khadi Mandal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-02-1996
Reported in: (1997)IIILLJ866HP
R.L. Khurana, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated March 3, 1994 of the District Judge, Una, reversing the judgment and decree dated December 30, 1988 of the Senior Sub-Judge, Una.2. The respondent, Himachal Khadi Mandal, hereinafter referred to as defendant, is a co-operative society formed in the year 1970 and registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The plaintiff was an employee of the defendant and has been in its continuous service since the time of its constitution. During the course of such employment, the plaintiff remained posted as Manager, Production Centre, Dulehar. Audit of the accounts of the said centre was carried out and as per audit report certain deficiencies were found in the stock of the centre. The plaintiff was accordingly served with a notice dated June 13, 1983 calling upon him to show cause to and explain the allegations made therein. No reply was submitted by the plaintiff to s...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »