Himachal Pradesh Court March 1998 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.
Tilak Singh Vs. Shashi Bijulwan and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1998
Reported in: II(1998)ACC297,1999ACJ661
R.L. Khurana, J.1. The above noted appeal and the cross-objections arising out of the award dated 8.12.1992 of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chamba, (for short 'the Tribunal') passed in ACT Case No. 28 of 1989, are being disposed of by this single judgment.2. One Rajinder Singh, a science teacher of about 35 years of age, died in an accident on 31.10.1989 which took place at about 7.30 p.m. near Tarvai curve within the local limits of jurisdiction of Police Station Tissa of District Chamba. The deceased at the relevant time was travelling as a pillion rider on scooter No. HIC 865 of which Tilak Singh, appellant before this Court, was the owner-cum-driver.3. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, the widow and minor daughters of the deceased, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, approached the learned Tribunal under Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 7,00,000 for the death of the deceased. It was averred that the accident had taken place ...
Mittar Singh Vs. Ashish Kumar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1998
Reported in: 1998ACJ1200
P.K. Palli, J.1. All these Miscellaneous Petitions (CMP (M) Nos. 669 to 672 of 1997) are proposed to be disposed of by a common order. All these petitions are directed against the award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nahan, dated 25.9.1997.2. The facts and the accident are not disputed. On analysis, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of less than Rs. 10,000/- in each of these petitions on account of compensation for the injuries sustained by the applicants/claimants in the course of the accident. Liability has been fastened on respondent Nos. 1 and 2 before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, i.e., the owner as well as the driver of the offending bus, jointly and severally. Admittedly, the remedy of statutory appeal is barred when the amount of compensation is less than Rs. 10,000/-.3. It is in this manner that challenge to the award has been made by the petitioner by way of petitions filed under Section 227 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Kuldip Singh has referred to...
Mast Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-18-1998
Reported in: 1999ACJ477,(1999)ILLJ1278HP
M.N. Rao, C.J.1. This appeal by the injured workman is from the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Shimla in case No. LAO(1)-R-35/1984 dated March 24, 1987 seeking enhancement of compensation from Rs. 5,260/- awarded by the Commissioner to Rs. 21,228/- with interest thereon from October 12, 1984, the date of institution of the claim. The appellant was working as a laborer under the Assistant Engineer, Thanadhar Sub-Division and in the course of his employment, he sustained an injury on September 21, 1984. The Medical Certificate issued by the Doctor and produced by the department before the Commissioner disclosed that the appellant sustained fracture of right claricle and fracture of right knee. The nature of the disability was described as permanent and the percentage of disability with loss of earning capacity was assessed by the Doctor at 'twenty per cent to whole body'. The Doctor (Orthopaedic Surgeon, Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla) also opined that the a...
Leela Dutt Vs. Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-17-1998
Reported in: [1998]93CompCas388(HP)
Kamlesh Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings under which the balance amount of loan and interest allegedly due and payable to the respondent-Corporation is being recovered from him as arrears of land revenue. The main challenge is that these proceedings have been initiated on the certificate issued by the managing director of the respondent-Corporation that a sum of Rs. 8,85,512 was due from the petitioner, which certificate was issued without giving him any opportunity. This certificate is issued under Section 3(1)(d)(4) of the Himachal Pradesh Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1973 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). Relying upon the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in M.A. Kamath v. Karnataka State Financial Corporation, AIR 1981 Kar 193, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the certificate issued by the managing director for recovery of the loan amount deserves to be quashed being violative of the principles of natural justice, as no opportu...
Rudra and Company, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-10-1998
Reported in: [1998]233ITR66(HP)
M.N. Rao, C.J. 1. All the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are liquor licence-holders ; they purchase country liquor from Government distilleries and sell the same to retail shops which cater to the demands of individual consumers. In each of these petitions, a writ of mandamus is sought against the respondents-income-tax authorities, not to collect the income-tax at source and consequently refund the tax collected under Section 206C of the Income-tax Act. 2. On behalf of the petitioners it is contended that the Division Bench of this court in Gian Chand Ashok Kumar and Co. v. Union of India , declared that L-13 licensees fell within the purview of Section 44AC, therefore, the tax at source in so far as the purchases made by them were concerned, should not be deducted and that judgment applies on all fours to the present petitioners. 3. In opposition to this, the learned Advocate-General has urged that the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench of this court has no relevan...
Rudra and Co. and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-10-1998
Reported in: (1999)152CTR(HP)27
M.N. RAO, C.J.:All the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions are liquor licence-holders ; they purchase country liquor from Govt. distilleries and sell the same to retail shops which cater to the demands of individual consumers. In each of these petitions, a writ of mandamus is sought against the respondents-IT authorities, not to collect the income-tax at source and consequently refund the tax collected under s. 206C of the IT Act.2. On behalf of the petitioners it is contended that the Division Bench of this Court in Gian Chand Ashok Kumar & Co. vs . Union of India declared that L-13 licensees fell within the purview of s. 44AC, therefore, the tax at source in so far as the purchases made by them were concerned, should not be deducted and that judgment applies on all fours to the present petitioners.3. In opposition to this, the learned Advocate-General has urged that the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench of this Court has no relevance since s. 44AC itself was deleted an...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›