Himachal Pradesh Court March 1997 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.
Gayson Rolling Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs. Hemkunt Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1997
Reported in: [1999]95CompCas194(HP)
A.L. Vaidya, J. 1. The present petition for winding up of the respondent-company has been preferred by the above-named petitioner under Section 433(c), (e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956, read with rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959. At the time of submission of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner pressed the claim of the petitioner for winding up of the respondent-company on the sole ground that the respondent-company was unable to pay its debts as is provided under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act. It is with this background that the detailed facts are not essential to be referred to here but the relevant facts giving rise to the present petition are mentioned herein-below :'That the petitioner is a private limited company. Shri K. C. Thakur is a manager and has been duly authorised by the company to file the petition. The petitioner-company has a re-rolling mill for M. S. rounds tor-steel, etc. The petitioner has been purchasing ingots from the responde...
Pamwi Tissues and anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1997
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ138HP
M. Srinivasan, C.J. 1. In these three writ petition the common question is whether the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Shimla is liable to be interfered with on account of its suffering from any error on the face of the record. The learned Counsel for the petitioners urges three contentions. The first contention is that the Labour Court in the last paragraph of the award commanded the petitioners herein to reinstate the workers forthwith on the presentation of the copy of the order by them before it with all back wages and consequential benefits and other advantageous payments which may have accrued to them till that date. The learned Counsel submits that this direction or command as it is expressed by the Labour Court is wholly illegal as it runs counter to the specific provisions of Sections 17 and 17-A of the Industrial Disputes Act. There is no doubt whatever that the direction given by the Labour Court is erroneous as it is against the provisions of Sections 1...
Smt. Gulabi and Etc. Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1997
Reported in: AIR1998HP9
A.K. Goel, J.1. Since all the aforesaid appeals have arisen out of common award, as such we propose to take up and dispose of these appeals together and by a common judgment.2. Brief facts of this case are that land was proposed to be acquired for public purpose namely, for construction of National Highway-21 and for this purpose Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued vide Notification SE-VI/1A-Padoh/G-V-l9638-42, dated 23-1-1982 by Himachal Pradesh Government in its Public Works Department. Notification under Sections 6 and 7 was issued on 24-1-1983. Thesewere followed by further notice under Section 9 of Land Acquisition Act to the persons interested, who appeared before the Land Acquisition Collector. Total land sought to be acquired was 9-2-13 bighas and was of different qualities, viz., Barani-I 6-3-10 bighas, Barani-II 1 -8-5 bighas, Banjar Kadim 0-0-9 bighas, Gair Mumkin 1-8-17 bighas and Kharater 0-1-12 big...
Dev Kala and ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-18-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ632
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Petitioners, namely, Dev Kala (widow), Usha, Dodi, Kolti (minor daughters), Uttami (mother), Duni Chand and Jeet Ram, brothers of deceased Bhinder Singh have filed this writ petition claiming a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation on account of the death of said Bhinder Singh in police custody by merciless beating by the police.2. The relevant facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:3. On 2.6.1993 there was a robbery in village Mashara Thawa Kothi Naggar, District Kullu and Manali. Police registered case F.I.R. No. 110 of 1993 dated 4.6.1993 under Sections 457/380 Indian Penal Code. Chhaju Ram, respondent No. 4, was Station House Officer and A.S.I. Sohan Lai, respondent No. 5, was the Additional Station House Officer attached to Manali Police Station. Both these police officials had summoned Bhinder Singh amongst others in connection with the investigation of the said F.I.R. He was arrested on 5.6.1993. The petitioners have alleged tha...
Himachal Pradesh Nagar Vikas Pradhikaran Vs. Regional Provident Fund C ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ267HP
M. Srinivasan, C. J.1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Sub-Regional Office, Stokes Place, Shimla, dated September 25, 1996 passed under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). By the said order, the first respondent has rejected the contentions of the petitioner that the provisions of the Act are not applicable to the petitioner and held that the petitioner is liable to comply with the provisions of the Act in respect of its employees engaged directly or through the contractor engaged for its activities for the period under enquiry and also for further period.2. Before the petitioner came into existence, the concerned body was known as Shimla Development Authority under the provisions or H.P. Town and Country Planning Act, 1977. The petitioner was constituted by the Government in exercise of its powers under Section 40 of the said Act, by a Notificati...
Atma Ram Vs. Smt. Janki and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-1997
Reported in: AIR1998HP14
Kamlesh Sharma, J.1. The appellant-applicant Atma Ram and respondent-Asha Ram are sons, respondent-Janki is the widow and respondents 3 to 8 are daughters and grand sons of late Shri Laturia.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24-2-1986 passed by Senior Sub-Judge, Bilaspur exercising the delegated powers of District Judge, Bilaspur whereby the application of the appellant-applicant for granting him probate for Will Ex. PA was partly allowed to the extent of 1/8 share in the amount of Rs. 17,012-55 paise lying in Savings Bank Account No. 520541 and Time Deposit Account No. 7510084 at Branch Post Office Jejawin in the name of late Shri Laturia.3. The Senior Sub-Judge, Bilaspur has also ordered grant of probate in favour of respondents 1/8 share each in the amount of Rs. 17,012-55 paise lying in deposit in the said accounts. However, record shows that only respondent No. 2, Asha Ram had furnished the requisite stamps for drawing succession certificate which was issued to...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›