Himachal Pradesh Court March 1999 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.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Hari Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: I(1999)ACC690,2000ACJ1531
Kamlesh Sharma, J. 1. These six appeals [F.A.O. (MVA) Nos. 104, 106, 107, 108, 109 and 110 of 1990] and three cross-objections (CO. Nos. 170 of 1990, 133 and 134 of 1991) are being disposed of by a common judgment as these arise out of the same accident and a common award dated 2.4.1990 whereby the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (1), Mandi, Kullu and Lahaul Spiti Districts at Mandi (hereinafter called as 'the Tribunal') has determined the compensation payable to the respondents-claimants by the driver as well as the owner of the ill-fated truck No. HID 1405 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Mandi, with which the said truck was insured at the time of the accident. The liability of the owner as well as the driver and the insurance company has been held joint as well as several. Only the insurance company has filed these appeals challenging its liability to indemnify the insured, i.e., the owner of the truck on the ground that the deceased, whose legal representatives are the respondents-...
indrajit Boral and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: (2000)ILLJ57HP
ORDERD. Raju, C.J. 1. This batch of writ petitions may be dealt with together since not only they involve common and identical issues for consideration but the learned counsel appearing on either side also made common submissions. For appreciation of the respective contentions of parties, the factual details noticed in C.W.P. No. 805 of 1993 and C.W.P. No. 1458 of 1995 as disclosed from the pleadings of parties may be adverted to. C.W.P, No. 805 of 1993 2. This writ petition has been filed jointly by two petitioners. The first of the petitioners claims to be Personnel Officer in the National Hydro Electric Power Corporation Ltd. (for short NHPC or Corporation), Chamera Hydro Electric Project and is said to be posted at the time of the filing of the writ petition at Khairi, Chamba District in Himachal Pradesh. He was said to have been appointed with effect from June 2, 1989 as Probationary Executive (Personnel) under an appointment order dated June 2, 1989 filed as Annexure P-l, in the ...
Smt. Vimla Devi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-24-1999
Reported in: AIR1999HP38
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Petitioner, a candidate for the office of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Nanj, Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi has filed this writ petition challenging the validity and correctness of the order dated 5-8-1998 of Deputy Commissioner, Mandi-cum-Appellate Authority in appeal file No. 15/97 by which, order of the S.D.O(C)-cum-Authorised Officer, Ghumarwin was set aside and petitioner's election petition challenging the election of respondent No. 4 was dismissed.2. The petitioner and respondent No. 4 contested for the office of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Nanj in the year 1995. The votes had to be counted on 18-12-1995. Respondent No. 4 secured 350 valid votes whereas the petitioner secured 349 valid votes and respondent No. 4 was declared as elected for the office of the Pradhan by the returning Officer. This declaration of respondent No. 4 as Pradhan was challenged by means of election petition under Section 161 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 read with Rul...
Balwinder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: (1999)IILLJ1116HP
D. Raju, C. J. 1. The above writ petition has been filed seeking for the issue of a writ to set aside the memo, dated August 22, 1992, filed as Annexure P-5, whereunder the services of the petitioner have been dispensed with and for a consequential direction to the respondent to continue the petitioner in their employment.2. The case of the petitioner is that he did his matriculation from H.P. Board of School Education in 1981 that he also did his Diploma in Stenography from Industrial Training Institute at Nahan, that he possessed the knowledge of Typing, both in Hindi and English and with such qualification, the petitioner is eligible for employment as Clerk in Government departments, semi-Government departments or other institutions owned and controlled by the Government. The further claim of the petitioner is that he got himself registered with the Employment Exchange, Una, since 1981 that the third respondent-temple was taken over by the Government among other temples by enacting ...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Ram Dass
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2802
D. Raju, C.J.1. The above appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 30-12-1994 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspurin Case No. 131-1 of 1993, whereunder the Court below chose to acquit the respondent of the charge under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The case of the prosecution before the Court below was that at about 12 noon on 19-10-1993 when Smt. Gita Devi wife of Sukh Ram was cutting grass in her Ghasni at village Baghi, accused Ram Dass came on the spot, caught hold of her from her arms and threw her sickle on one side and gagged her mouth with one hand and with the other hand, he caught her breast with an intention to outrage her modesty. On such action, the victim was said to have raised an alarm and on hearing her cries, M/S Shyam Lal and Nand Lal, who were just passing nearby came to the spot and on seeing them coming, Ram Dass also ran away from the spot. The victim who was s...
Central Bank of India Vs. Eleena Fasteners (P) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-1999
Reported in: AIR1999HP104,[1999]98CompCas3(HP)
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. The present suit for the recovery of Rs. 5,71,749.85 has been preferred by the plaintiff-Bank against the four defendants under Order 34, Code of Civil Procedure.2. Defendant No. 1 M/s. Eleena Fasteners (P) Ltd. is a private limited company incorporated under the Companies Act. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are the promoters and Directors thereon. On having been authorised by the Board of Directors of defendant No. 1, defendants 2 and 3 approached the plaintiff-Bank at Nahan for the grant of cash credit facility against hypothecationof stock and for the gram of bill discounting facility. The plaintiff-Bank granted cash credit facility to the tune of Rs. 2.30 lacs and bill discounting facility to the tune of Rs. 3 lacs to defendant No. 1 on the condition that the defendant-Company and its Directors will remain bound by all terms and conditions' of loan facilities. Defendants 2 and 3 also undertook to give their personal security forthe repayment of the amount sanctione...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. J.M. Builders and Engineers
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-1999
Reported in: AIR1999HP52
R.L. Khurana, J.1. The present appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been preferred by the defendant. Union of India, against the judgment and decree dated 21-9-1993 of the learned single Judge passed in Civil Suit No. 98 of 1991 whereby the objections preferred by the defendant under Sections 30/33 of the Act to the award dated 1-5-1991 were dismissed and such award was made the rule of the Court and a decree in terms thereof came to be passed in favour of the respondent-plaintiff and against the defendant. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are these. The work of 'Provision of water Borne Sanitation at Bakloh Cantonment' in District Chamba was awarded to the plaintiff vide agreement No. CWE/M-35/85-86. Since a dispute arose between the parties with regard to such agreement and the execution of the work, Lt. Col. P.S. Raina was appointed as the sole Arbitrator to go into the dispute between the parties and to make his award...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›